draft-ietf-netmod-yang-usage-04.txt   draft-ietf-netmod-yang-usage-05.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force A. Bierman Internet Engineering Task Force A. Bierman
Internet-Draft InterWorking Labs Internet-Draft InterWorking Labs
Intended status: Informational April 20, 2010 Intended status: Informational May 18, 2010
Expires: October 22, 2010 Expires: November 19, 2010
Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG Data Model Documents Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG Data Model Documents
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-usage-04 draft-ietf-netmod-yang-usage-05
Abstract Abstract
This memo provides guidelines for authors and reviewers of standards This memo provides guidelines for authors and reviewers of standards
track specifications containing YANG data model modules. Applicable track specifications containing YANG data model modules. Applicable
portions may be used as a basis for reviews of other YANG data model portions may be used as a basis for reviews of other YANG data model
documents. Recommendations and procedures are defined, which are documents. Recommendations and procedures are defined, which are
intended to increase interoperability and usability of NETCONF intended to increase interoperability and usability of NETCONF
implementations which utilize YANG data model modules. implementations which utilize YANG data model modules.
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 22, 2010. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 19, 2010.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 3, line 22 skipping to change at page 2, line 23
2.4. Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.4. Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. General Documentation Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. General Documentation Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.1. Module Copyright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1. Module Copyright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Narrative Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. Narrative Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3. Definitions Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.3. Definitions Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.4. Security Considerations Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.4. Security Considerations Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.5. IANA Considerations Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.5. IANA Considerations Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.5.1. Documents that Create a New Name Space . . . . . . . . 8 3.5.1. Documents that Create a New Name Space . . . . . . . . 8
3.5.2. Documents that Extend an Existing Name Space . . . . . 9 3.5.2. Documents that Extend an Existing Name Space . . . . . 9
3.6. Reference Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.6. Reference Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.7. Copyright Notices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.7. Intellectual Property Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.8. Intellectual Property Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. YANG Usage Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. YANG Usage Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1. Module Naming Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. Module Naming Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2. Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2. Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3. Defaults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3. Defaults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4. Conditional Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.4. Conditional Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.5. Lifecycle Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.5. XPath Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.6. Header Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.6. Lifecycle Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.7. Temporary Namespace Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.7. Module Header, Meta, and Revision Statements . . . . . . . 13
4.8. Top Level Database Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.8. Namespace Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.9. Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.9. Top Level Data Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.10. Reusable Type Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.10. Data Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.11. Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.11. Reusable Type Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.12. Operation Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.12. Data Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.13. Notification Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.13. Operation Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4.14. Notification Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Appendix A. Module Review Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Appendix B. YANG Module Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Appendix A. Module Review Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Appendix C. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Appendix B. YANG Module Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
C.1. Changes from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Appendix C. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
C.2. Changes from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 C.1. Changes from 04 to 05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
C.3. Changes from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 C.2. Changes from 03 to 04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
C.4. Changes from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 C.3. Changes from 02 to 03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 C.4. Changes from 01 to 02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
C.5. Changes from 00 to 01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The standardization of network configuration interfaces for use with The standardization of network configuration interfaces for use with
the NETCONF [RFC4741] protocol requires a modular set of data models, the NETCONF [RFC4741] protocol requires a modular set of data models,
which can be reused and extended over time. which can be reused and extended over time.
This document defines a set of usage guidelines for standards track This document defines a set of usage guidelines for standards track
documents containing YANG [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang] data models. It is documents containing YANG [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang] data models. It is
similar to the MIB usage guidelines specification [RFC4181] in intent similar to the SMIv2 usage guidelines specification [RFC4181] in
and structure. intent and structure.
Many YANG constructs are defined as optional to use, such as the Many YANG constructs are defined as optional to use, such as the
description clause. However, in order to maximize interoperability description statement. However, in order to maximize
of NETCONF implementations utilizing YANG data models, it is interoperability of NETCONF implementations utilizing YANG data
desirable to define a set of usage guidelines which may require a models, it is desirable to define a set of usage guidelines which may
higher level of compliance than the minimum level defined in the YANG require a higher level of compliance than the minimum level defined
specification. in the YANG specification.
This document defines usage guidelines related to the NETCONF This document defines usage guidelines related to the NETCONF
operations layer, and NETCONF content layer, as defined in [RFC4741]. operations layer, and NETCONF content layer, as defined in [RFC4741].
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
2.1. Requirements Notation 2.1. Requirements Notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
RFC 2119 language is used here to express the views of the NETMOD RFC 2119 language is used here to express the views of the NETMOD
working group regarding YANG module content. Yang modules complying working group regarding YANG module content. YANG modules complying
with this document will treat the RFC 2119 terminology as if it were with this document will treat the RFC 2119 terminology as if it were
describing best current practices. describing best current practices.
2.2. NETCONF Terms 2.2. NETCONF Terms
The following terms are defined in [RFC4741] and are not redefined The following terms are defined in [RFC4741] and are not redefined
here: here:
o capabilities o capabilities
skipping to change at page 7, line 16 skipping to change at page 7, line 16
YANG data model modules under review are likely to be contained in YANG data model modules under review are likely to be contained in
Internet Drafts. All guidelines for Internet Draft authors MUST be Internet Drafts. All guidelines for Internet Draft authors MUST be
followed. These guidelines are available online at: followed. These guidelines are available online at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-editor/instructions2authors.txt http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-editor/instructions2authors.txt
The following sections MUST be present in an Internet Draft The following sections MUST be present in an Internet Draft
containing a module: containing a module:
o YANG data model boilerplate section
o Narrative sections o Narrative sections
o Definitions section o Definitions section
o Security Considerations section o Security Considerations section
o IANA Considerations section o IANA Considerations section
o References section o References section
3.1. Module Copyright 3.1. Module Copyright
The module description statement MUST contain the latest approved The module description statement MUST contain a reference to the
IETF Trust Copyright statement, which is available on-line, in latest approved IETF Trust Copyright statement, which is available
section 4 of the Trust Legal Provisions (TLP) document, at: on-line at:
http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/ http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/
Each YANG module or submodule contained within an Internet Draft or Each YANG module or submodule contained within an Internet Draft or
RFC MUST be identified as a 'Code Component'. The strings '<CODE RFC is considered to be a code component. The strings '<CODE
BEGINS>' and '<CODE ENDS>' SHOULD be used to identify each Code BEGINS>' and '<CODE ENDS>' SHOULD be used to identify each code
Component. component.
The '<CODE BEGINS>' tag SHOULD be followed by a string identifying
the file name specified in section 5.2 of [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang].
For example, if the latest revision date of the 'ietf-foo' module is
'2010-01-18', then the following '<CODE BEGINS>' line would be used:
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-foo@2010-01-18.yang"
3.2. Narrative Sections 3.2. Narrative Sections
The narrative part MUST include an overview section that describes The narrative part MUST include an overview section that describes
the scope and field of application of the module(s) defined by the the scope and field of application of the module(s) defined by the
specification and that specifies the relationship (if any) of these specification and that specifies the relationship (if any) of these
modules to other standards, particularly to standards containing modules to other standards, particularly to standards containing
other module modules. The narrative part SHOULD include one or more other YANG modules. The narrative part SHOULD include one or more
sections to briefly describe the structure of the modules defined in sections to briefly describe the structure of the modules defined in
the specification. the specification.
If the module(s) defined by the specification import definitions from If the module(s) defined by the specification import definitions from
other modules (except for those defined in the YANG other modules (except for those defined in the YANG
[I-D.ietf-netmod-yang] or YANG Types [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-types] [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang] or YANG Types [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-types]
documents) or are always implemented in conjunction with other documents) or are always implemented in conjunction with other
modules, then those facts MUST be noted in the overview section, as modules, then those facts MUST be noted in the overview section, as
MUST any special interpretations of objects in other modules. MUST any special interpretations of definitions in other modules.
3.3. Definitions Section 3.3. Definitions Section
This section contains the module(s) defined by the specification. This section contains the module(s) defined by the specification.
These modules MUST be written in YANG [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang]. These modules MUST be written in YANG [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang].
See Section 4 for guidelines on YANG usage. See Section 4 for guidelines on YANG usage.
3.4. Security Considerations Section 3.4. Security Considerations Section
Each specification that defines one or more modules MUST contain a Each specification that defines one or more modules MUST contain a
section that discusses security considerations relevant to those section that discusses security considerations relevant to those
modules. This section MUST be patterned after the latest approved modules. This section MUST be patterned after the latest approved
template (available at http://www.ops.ietf.org/yang-security.html). template (available at http://www.ops.ietf.org/yang-security.html).
[ed.: this online document does not exist yet.]
In particular, writable module objects that could be especially In particular, writable data nodes that could be especially
disruptive if abused MUST be explicitly listed by name and the disruptive if abused MUST be explicitly listed by name and the
associated security risks MUST be spelled out; similarly, readable associated security risks MUST be spelled out; similarly, readable
module objects that contain especially sensitive information or that data nodes that contain especially sensitive information or that
raise significant privacy concerns MUST be explicitly listed by name raise significant privacy concerns MUST be explicitly listed by name
and the reasons for the sensitivity/privacy concerns MUST be and the reasons for the sensitivity/privacy concerns MUST be
explained. explained.
3.5. IANA Considerations Section 3.5. IANA Considerations Section
In order to comply with IESG policy as set forth in In order to comply with IESG policy as set forth in
http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html, every Internet-Draft that is http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html, every Internet-Draft that is
submitted to the IESG for publication MUST contain an IANA submitted to the IESG for publication MUST contain an IANA
Considerations section. The requirements for this section vary Considerations section. The requirements for this section vary
depending what actions are required of the IANA. depending what actions are required of the IANA. Refer to the
guidelines in [RFC5226] for more details.
3.5.1. Documents that Create a New Name Space 3.5.1. Documents that Create a New Name Space
If an Internet-Draft defines a new name space that is to be If an Internet-Draft defines a new name space that is to be
administered by the IANA, then the document MUST include an IANA administered by the IANA, then the document MUST include an IANA
Considerations section, that specifies how the name space is to be Considerations section, that specifies how the name space is to be
administered. administered.
Specifically, if any YANG module namespace statement value contained Specifically, if any YANG module namespace statement value contained
in the document is not already registered with IANA, then a new YANG in the document is not already registered with IANA, then a new YANG
skipping to change at page 9, line 21 skipping to change at page 9, line 27
3.6. Reference Sections 3.6. Reference Sections
For every import or include statement which appears in a module For every import or include statement which appears in a module
contained in the specification, which identifies a module in a contained in the specification, which identifies a module in a
separate document, a corresponding normative reference to that separate document, a corresponding normative reference to that
document MUST appear in the Normative References section. The document MUST appear in the Normative References section. The
reference MUST correspond to the specific module version actually reference MUST correspond to the specific module version actually
used within the specification. used within the specification.
For every reference statement which appears in a module contained in For every normative reference statement which appears in a module
the specification, which identifies a separate document, a contained in the specification, which identifies a separate document,
corresponding normative reference to that document SHOULD appear in a corresponding normative reference to that document SHOULD appear in
the Normative References section. The reference SHOULD correspond to the Normative References section. The reference SHOULD correspond to
the specific document version actually used within the specification. the specific document version actually used within the specification.
If the reference statement identifies an informative reference, which
identifies a separate document, a corresponding informative reference
to that document MAY appear in the Informative References section.
3.7. Copyright Notices 3.7. Intellectual Property Section
The proper copyright notices MUST be present in the module
description statement. Refer to the IETF Trust Legal Provision for
the exact legal text that needs to be included.
3.8. Intellectual Property Section
The proper IPR statements MUST be present in the document, according The proper IPR statements MUST be present in the document, according
to the most current Internet Draft boilerplate. Refer to the IETF to the most current Internet Draft boilerplate. Refer to the IETF
Trust Legal Provision for the exact legal text that needs to be Trust Legal Provision for the exact legal text that needs to be
included. included.
4. YANG Usage Guidelines 4. YANG Usage Guidelines
In general, modules in IETF standards-track specifications MUST In general, modules in IETF standards-track specifications MUST
comply with all syntactic and semantic requirements of YANG. comply with all syntactic and semantic requirements of YANG.
skipping to change at page 10, line 38 skipping to change at page 10, line 38
being defined to extend one or more existing modules, then the same being defined to extend one or more existing modules, then the same
word or acronym should be reused, instead of creating a new one. word or acronym should be reused, instead of creating a new one.
All published module names MUST be unique. All published module names MUST be unique.
Once a module name is published, it MUST not be reused, even if the Once a module name is published, it MUST not be reused, even if the
RFC containing the module is reclassified to 'Historic' status. RFC containing the module is reclassified to 'Historic' status.
4.2. Identifiers 4.2. Identifiers
Identifiers for all published modules, submodules, typedefs, Identifiers for all YANG identifiers in published modules MUST be
groupings, data objects, operations, and notifications MUST be between 1 and 64 characters in length. These includes any construct
between 1 and 64 characters in length. specified as an 'identifier-arg-str' token in the ABNF in section 12
of [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang].
4.3. Defaults 4.3. Defaults
In general, it is suggested that sub-statements containing default In general, it is suggested that sub-statements containing very
values SHOULD NOT be present. For example, 'status current;', common default values SHOULD NOT be present. The following sub-
'config true;', 'mandatory false;', and 'max-elements unbounded;' are statements are commonly used with the default value, which would make
common defaults which would make the module difficult to read if used the module difficult to read if used everywhere they are allowed.
everywhere they are allowed.
Instead, it is suggested that common statements SHOULD only be used +---------------+---------------+
when being set to a value other than the default value. | Statement | Default Value |
+---------------+---------------+
| config | true |
| | |
| mandatory | false |
| | |
| max-elements | unbounded |
| | |
| min-elements | 0 |
| | |
| ordered-by | system |
| | |
| status | current |
| | |
| yin-element | false |
+---------------+---------------+
4.4. Conditional Statements 4.4. Conditional Statements
A module may be conceptually partitioned in several ways, using the A module may be conceptually partitioned in several ways, using the
'if-feature' and/or 'when' statements. 'if-feature' and/or 'when' statements.
Data model designers need to carefully consider all modularity Data model designers need to carefully consider all modularity
aspects, including the use of YANG conditional statements. aspects, including the use of YANG conditional statements.
Objects SHOULD NOT directly reference NETCONF capabilities, in order If a data definition is optional, depending on server support for a
to specify optional behavior. Instead, a 'feature' statement SHOULD NETCONF protocol capability, then a YANG 'feature' statement SHOULD
be defined instead of a NETCONF capability, and the 'if-feature' be defined to indicate the NETCONF capability is supported within the
statement SHOULD be used within the optional object definition. data model.
If the condition associated with the desired semantics is not 4.5. XPath Usage
dependent on any particular instance value within the database, then
an 'if-feature' statement SHOULD be used instead of a 'when'
statement.
The 'attribute' and 'namespace' axis SHOULD NOT be used because the The 'attribute' and 'namespace' axes are not supported in YANG, and
associated XML node types are not supported in YANG, and may not be MAY be empty in a NETCONF server implementation.
supported consistently across NETCONF server implementations.
The 'position' and 'last' functions MAY be used with caution, within The 'position' and 'last' functions MAY be used with caution. A
a single server implementation. These functions may be useful in server is not required to maintain any particular XML document order
some cases when processing user-ordered lists. A server is only for system-ordered data nodes. A server is only required to maintain
required to maintain the XML order of a user-ordered list or leaf- the relative XML document order of all instances of a particular
list. user-ordered list or leaf-list.
The 'preceding', and 'following' axes SHOULD NOT be used. These The 'preceding', and 'following' axes SHOULD NOT be used. These
constructs rely on XML document order within a NETCONF server constructs rely on XML document order within a NETCONF server
configuration database, which may not be supported consistently or configuration database, which may not be supported consistently or
produce reliable results across implementations. Predicate produce reliable results across implementations. Predicate
expressions based on static node properties (e.g., name, value, expressions based on static node properties (e.g., name, value,
ancestors, descendants) SHOULD be used instead. ancestors, descendants) SHOULD be used instead.
The 'preceding-sibling' and 'following-sibling' axes MAY be used, The 'preceding-sibling' and 'following-sibling' axes MAY be used,
with caution. A server is not required to maintain a persistent or with caution. A server is not required to maintain a persistent or
deterministic XML document order, which will affect use of these deterministic XML document order, which will affect use of these
axes. axes.
Implicit 'position' function calls within predicates SHOULD NOT be Implicit 'position' function calls within predicates MAY be used with
used. (e.g., //chapter[42]). caution. (e.g., //chapter[42]). Note that a NETCONF server is only
required to maintain relative document order for related instances of
a user-ordered list or leaf-list data definition (i.e., 'ordered-by'
statement set to 'user').
Data nodes which use the 'int64' and 'uint64' built-in type MAY be Data nodes which use the 'int64' and 'uint64' built-in type MAY be
used with caution, within relational expressions. There are boundary used with caution, within relational expressions. There are boundary
conditions in which the translation from the YANG 64-bit type to an conditions in which the translation from the YANG 64-bit type to an
XPath number can cause incorrect results. Specifically, an XPath XPath number can cause incorrect results. Specifically, an XPath
double precision floating point number cannot represent very large double precision floating point number cannot represent very large
positive or negative 64-bit numbers because it only provides a total positive or negative 64-bit numbers because it only provides a total
precision of 53 bits. precision of 53 bits.
Data modelers need to be careful not to confuse the YANG value space Data modelers need to be careful not to confuse the YANG value space
and the XPath value space. The data types are not the same in both, and the XPath value space. The data types are not the same in both,
and conversion between YANG and XPath data types SHOULD be considered and conversion between YANG and XPath data types SHOULD be considered
carefully. carefully.
Explicit XPath data type conversions MAY be used (e.g., 'string', Explicit XPath data type conversions MAY be used (e.g., 'string',
'boolean', or 'number' functions), instead of implicit XPath data 'boolean', or 'number' functions), instead of implicit XPath data
type conversions. type conversions.
4.5. Lifecycle Management 4.6. Lifecycle Management
The status statement SHOULD NOT be present if its value is 'current'. The status statement MUST be present if its value is 'deprecated' or
It MUST be present if its value is 'deprecated' or 'obsolete'. 'obsolete'.
The module or submodule name MUST NOT be changed, once the document The module or submodule name MUST NOT be changed, once the document
containing the module or submodule is published. containing the module or submodule is published.
The module namespace URI value MUST NOT be changed, once the document The module namespace URI value MUST NOT be changed, once the document
containing the module is published. containing the module is published.
The revision-date sub-statement (within the imports statement) SHOULD The revision-date sub-statement within the imports statement SHOULD
be present if any groupings are used from the external module. be present if any groupings are used from the external module.
The revision-date sub-statement (within the include statement) SHOULD The revision-date sub-statement within the include statement SHOULD
be present if any groupings are used from the external sub-module. be present if any groupings are used from the external sub-module.
If submodules are used, then the document containing the main module If submodules are used, then the document containing the main module
MUST be updated so that the main module revision date is equal or MUST be updated so that the main module revision date is equal or
more recent than the revision date of any submodule which is more recent than the revision date of any submodule which is
(directly or indirectly) included by the main module. (directly or indirectly) included by the main module.
4.6. Header Contents 4.7. Module Header, Meta, and Revision Statements
For published modules, the namespace MUST be a globally unique URI, For published modules, the namespace MUST be a globally unique URI,
as defined in [RFC3986]. This value is usually assigned by the IANA. as defined in [RFC3986]. This value is usually assigned by the IANA.
The organization statement MUST be present. If the module is The organization statement MUST be present. If the module is
contained in a documented intended for standards-track status, then contained in a documented intended for standards-track status, then
the organization SHOULD be the IETF working group chartered to write the organization SHOULD be the IETF working group chartered to write
the document. the document.
The contact statement MUST be present. If the module is contained in The contact statement MUST be present. If the module is contained in
a document intended for standards-track status, then the working a document intended for standards-track status, then the working
group WEB and mailing information MUST be present, and the document group WEB and mailing information MUST be present, and the document
author contact information SHOULD be present. In addition, the Area author contact information SHOULD be present. In addition, the Area
Director and other contact information MAY be present. Director and other contact information MAY be present.
The description statement MUST be present. The appropriate IETF The description statement MUST be present. The appropriate IETF
Trust Copyright text MUST be present, as described in Section 3.1. Trust Copyright text MUST be present, as described in Section 3.1.
Modules are often extracted from their original documents and it is
useful for developers and operators to know how to find the original
source document in a consistent manner.
If the module relies on information contained in other documents, If the module relies on information contained in other documents,
which are not the same documents implied by the import statements which are not the same documents implied by the import statements
present in the module, then these documents MUST be identified in the present in the module, then these documents MUST be identified in the
reference statement. reference statement.
A revision statement MUST be present for each published version of A revision statement MUST be present for each published version of
the module. The revision statement MUST have a reference the module. The revision statement MUST have a reference
substatement. It MUST identify the published document which contains substatement. It MUST identify the published document which contains
the module. the module. Modules are often extracted from their original
documents and it is useful for developers and operators to know how
to find the original source document in a consistent manner. The
revision statement MAY have a description substatement.
Each new revision MUST include a revision date which is higher than Each new revision MUST include a revision date which is higher than
any other revision date in the module. any other revision date in the module.
It is acceptable to reuse the same revision statement within It is acceptable to reuse the same revision statement within
unpublished versions (i.e., Internet Drafts), but the revision date unpublished versions (i.e., Internet Drafts), but the revision date
MUST be updated to a higher value each time the Internet Draft is re- MUST be updated to a higher value each time the Internet Draft is re-
published. published.
4.7. Temporary Namespace Assignments 4.8. Namespace Assignments
It is desirable to include only valid YANG modules in documents, It is desirable to include only valid YANG modules in documents,
whether they are published yet or not. This allows: whether they are published yet or not. This allows:
o the module to compile correctly instead of generating disruptive o the module to compile correctly instead of generating disruptive
fatal errors. fatal errors.
o early implementors to use the modules without picking a random o early implementors to use the modules without picking a random
value for the XML namespace. value for the XML namespace.
o early interoperability testing since independent implementations o early interoperability testing since independent implementations
will use the same XML namespace value. will use the same XML namespace value.
Until a URI is assigned by the IANA, a temporary namespace URI MUST Until a URI is assigned by the IANA, a proposed namespace URI MUST be
be provided for the namespace statement in a YANG module. A value provided for the namespace statement in a YANG module. A value
SHOULD be selected which is not likely to collide with other YANG SHOULD be selected which is not likely to collide with other YANG
namespaces. namespaces. Standard module names, prefixes, and URI strings already
listed in the YANG Module Registry MUST NOT be used.
A standard namespace statement value SHOULD have the following form: A standard namespace statement value SHOULD have the following form:
<URN prefix string>:<module-name> <URN prefix string>:<module-name>
The following URN prefix string SHOULD be used for published and The following URN prefix string SHOULD be used for published and
unpublished YANG modules unpublished YANG modules:
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:
The following example URNs would be valid temporary namespace The following example URNs would be valid temporary namespace
statement values for standards-track modules: statement values for standards-track modules:
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-partial-lock urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-partial-lock
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-state urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-state
skipping to change at page 14, line 33 skipping to change at page 15, line 5
the guidelines in [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang]. the guidelines in [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang].
The following examples of non-standards track modules are only The following examples of non-standards track modules are only
suggestions. There are no guidelines for this type of URN in this suggestions. There are no guidelines for this type of URN in this
document: document:
http://example.com/ns/example-interfaces http://example.com/ns/example-interfaces
http://example.com/ns/example-system http://example.com/ns/example-system
4.8. Top Level Database Objects 4.9. Top Level Data Definitions
There SHOULD only be one top-level data node defined in each YANG There SHOULD only be one top-level data node defined in each YANG
module. However, there MAY be more than one if needed. module. However, there MAY be more than one if needed.
The top-level data organization SHOULD be considered carefully, in The top-level data organization SHOULD be considered carefully, in
advance. Data model designers need to consider how the functionality advance. Data model designers need to consider how the functionality
for a given protocol or protocol family will grow over time. for a given protocol or protocol family will grow over time.
The names and data organization SHOULD reflect persistent The names and data organization SHOULD reflect persistent
information, such as the name of a protocol. The name of the working information, such as the name of a protocol. The name of the working
group SHOULD NOT be used because this may change over time. group SHOULD NOT be used because this may change over time.
A mandatory database object is defined as a node that a client must A mandatory database data definition is defined as a node that a
provide for the database to be valid. The server will not provide a client must provide for the database to be valid. The server is not
value under any conditions. required to provide a value.
Top-level database objects MUST NOT be mandatory. If a mandatory Top-level database data definitions MUST NOT be mandatory. If a
node appears at the top-level, it will immediately cause the database mandatory node appears at the top-level, it will immediately cause
to be invalid. This can occur when the server boots or when a module the database to be invalid. This can occur when the server boots or
is loaded dynamically at runtime. when a module is loaded dynamically at runtime.
4.9. Data Types 4.10. Data Types
Selection of an appropriate data type (i.e., built-in type, existing Selection of an appropriate data type (i.e., built-in type, existing
derived type, or new derived type) is very subjective and therefore derived type, or new derived type) is very subjective and therefore
few requirements can be specified on that subject. few requirements can be specified on that subject.
Data model designers SHOULD use the most appropriate built-in data Data model designers SHOULD use the most appropriate built-in data
type for the particular application. type for the particular application.
If extensibility of enumerated values is required, then the If extensibility of enumerated values is required, then the
identityref data type SHOULD be used instead of an enumeration or identityref data type SHOULD be used instead of an enumeration or
other built-in type. other built-in type.
For string data types, if a machine-readable pattern can be defined For string data types, if a machine-readable pattern can be defined
for the desired semantics, then one or more pattern statements SHOULD for the desired semantics, then one or more pattern statements SHOULD
be present. be present.
For string data types, if the length of the string is required to For string data types, if the length of the string is required to
bounded in all implementations, then a length statement SHOULD be bounded in all implementations, then a length statement SHOULD be
present. present.
For string data types, object semantics SHOULD NOT rely on For string data types, data definition semantics SHOULD NOT rely on
preservation of leading and trailing whitespace characters. preservation of leading and trailing whitespace characters.
For numeric data types, if the values allowed by the intended For numeric data types, if the values allowed by the intended
semantics are different than those allowed by the unbounded intrinsic semantics are different than those allowed by the unbounded intrinsic
data type (e.g., int32), then a range statement SHOULD be present. data type (e.g., int32), then a range statement SHOULD be present.
The signed numeric data types (i.e., 'int8', 'int16', 'int32', and The signed numeric data types (i.e., 'int8', 'int16', 'int32', and
'int64') SHOULD NOT be used unless negative values are allowed for 'int64') SHOULD NOT be used unless negative values are allowed for
the desired semantics. the desired semantics.
For enumeration or bits data types, the semantics for each enum or For enumeration or bits data types, the semantics for each enum or
bit SHOULD be documented. A separate description statement (within bit SHOULD be documented. A separate description statement (within
each enum or bit statement) SHOULD be present. each enum or bit statement) SHOULD be present.
4.10. Reusable Type Definitions 4.11. Reusable Type Definitions
If an appropriate derived type exists in any standard module, such as If an appropriate derived type exists in any standard module, such as
[I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-types], then it SHOULD be used instead of [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-types], then it SHOULD be used instead of
defining a new derived type. defining a new derived type.
If an appropriate units identifier can be associated with the desired If an appropriate units identifier can be associated with the desired
semantics, then a units statement SHOULD be present. semantics, then a units statement SHOULD be present.
If an appropriate default value can be associated with the desired If an appropriate default value can be associated with the desired
semantics, then a default statement SHOULD be present. semantics, then a default statement SHOULD be present.
skipping to change at page 16, line 16 skipping to change at page 16, line 36
If a significant number of derived types are defined, and it is If a significant number of derived types are defined, and it is
anticipated that these data types will be reused by multiple modules, anticipated that these data types will be reused by multiple modules,
then these derived types SHOULD be contained in a separate module or then these derived types SHOULD be contained in a separate module or
submodule, to allow easier reuse without unnecessary coupling. submodule, to allow easier reuse without unnecessary coupling.
The description statement MUST be present. The description statement MUST be present.
If the type definition semantics are defined in an external document, If the type definition semantics are defined in an external document,
then the reference statement SHOULD be present. then the reference statement SHOULD be present.
4.11. Object Definitions 4.12. Data Definitions
The description statement MUST be present in the following body The description statement MUST be present in the following YANG
statements: statements:
o extension o anyxml
o feature
o identity
o typedef
o grouping
o augment o augment
o rpc o choice
o notification o container
The description statement MUST be present in the following data o extension
definition constructs: o feature
o container o grouping
o identity
o leaf o leaf
o leaf-list o leaf-list
o list o list
o choice o notification
o anyxml o rpc
If the object semantics are defined in an external document, then a
reference statement SHOULD be present. o typedef
If the data definition semantics are defined in an external document,
then a reference statement SHOULD be present.
The 'anyxml' construct MAY be used with caution within configuration The 'anyxml' construct MAY be used with caution within configuration
data. This may be useful to represent an HTML banner for example. data. This may be useful to represent an HTML banner containing
However, this construct SHOULD NOT be used if other YANG data node markup elements, such as <b> and </b>. However, this construct
types can be used instead to represent the desired syntax and SHOULD NOT be used if other YANG data node types can be used instead
semantics. to represent the desired syntax and semantics.
If there are referential integrity constraints associated with the If there are referential integrity constraints associated with the
desired semantics that can be represented with XPath, then one or desired semantics that can be represented with XPath, then one or
more must statements SHOULD be present. more must statements SHOULD be present.
For list and leaf-list objects, if the number of possible instances For list and leaf-list data definitions, if the number of possible
is required to be bounded for all implementations, then the max- instances is required to be bounded for all implementations, then the
elements statements SHOULD be present. max-elements statements SHOULD be present.
If any must or when statements are used within the object definition,
then the object description statement SHOULD describe the purpose of
each one.
4.12. Operation Definitions If any must or when statements are used within the data definition,
then the data definition description statement SHOULD describe the
purpose of each one.
The description statement MUST be present in 'rpc' statements 4.13. Operation Definitions
defining new operations.
If the operation semantics are defined in an external document, then If the operation semantics are defined in an external document, then
a reference statement SHOULD be present. a reference statement SHOULD be present.
If the operation impacts system behavior in some way, it SHOULD be If the operation impacts system behavior in some way, it SHOULD be
mentioned in the description statement. mentioned in the description statement.
If the operation is potentially harmful to system behavior in some If the operation is potentially harmful to system behavior in some
way, it MUST be mentioned in the Security Considerations section of way, it MUST be mentioned in the Security Considerations section of
the document. the document.
4.13. Notification Definitions 4.14. Notification Definitions
The description statement MUST be present. The description statement MUST be present.
If the notification semantics are defined in an external document, If the notification semantics are defined in an external document,
then a reference statement SHOULD be present. then a reference statement SHOULD be present.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
There are no actions requested of IANA at this time. This document registers one URI in the IETF XML registry [RFC3688].
The following registration is requested:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template
Registrant Contact: The NETMOD WG of the IETF.
XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace.
This document requests the following assignment in the YANG Module
Names Registry for the YANG module template in Appendix B.
+---------------+-------------------------------------------+
| Field | Value |
+---------------+-------------------------------------------+
| name | ietf-template |
| | |
| namespace | urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template |
| | |
| prefix | temp |
| | |
| reference | RFCXXXX |
+---------------+-------------------------------------------+
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This document defines documentation guidelines for NETCONF content This document defines documentation guidelines for NETCONF content
defined with the YANG data modeling language. It does not introduce defined with the YANG data modeling language. The guidelines for how
any new or increased security risks into the management system. to write a Security Considerations section for a YANG module are
defined in the online document
http://www.ops.ietf.org/yang-security.html [ed.: this online document
does not exist yet.]
This document does not introduce any new or increased security risks
into the management system.
7. Acknowledgments 7. Acknowledgments
The structure and contents of this document are adapted from The structure and contents of this document are adapted from
Guidelines for MIB Documents [RFC4181], by C. M. Heard. Guidelines for MIB Documents [RFC4181], by C. M. Heard.
The working group thanks Martin Bjorklund and Juergen Schoenwaelder
for their extensive reviews and contributions to this document.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
January 2004.
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform [RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66, Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
RFC 3986, January 2005. RFC 3986, January 2005.
[RFC4741] Enns, R., "NETCONF Configuration Protocol", RFC 4741, [RFC4741] Enns, R., "NETCONF Configuration Protocol", RFC 4741,
December 2006. December 2006.
[I-D.ietf-netmod-yang] [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang]
Bjorklund, M., "YANG - A data modeling language for Bjorklund, M., "YANG - A data modeling language for
NETCONF", draft-ietf-netmod-yang-12 (work in progress), NETCONF", draft-ietf-netmod-yang-12 (work in progress),
April 2010. April 2010.
[I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-types] [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-types]
Schoenwaelder, J., "Common YANG Data Types", Schoenwaelder, J., "Common YANG Data Types",
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-types-08 (work in progress), draft-ietf-netmod-yang-types-09 (work in progress),
April 2010. April 2010.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[RFC4181] Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB [RFC4181] Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB
Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005. Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
Appendix A. Module Review Checklist Appendix A. Module Review Checklist
This section is adapted from RFC 4181. This section is adapted from RFC 4181.
The purpose of a YANG module review is to review the YANG module both The purpose of a YANG module review is to review the YANG module both
for technical correctness and for adherence to IETF documentation for technical correctness and for adherence to IETF documentation
requirements. The following checklist may be helpful when reviewing requirements. The following checklist may be helpful when reviewing
a draft document: a draft document:
1. I-D Boilerplate -- verify that the draft contains the required 1. I-D Boilerplate -- verify that the draft contains the required
skipping to change at page 23, line 23 skipping to change at page 24, line 23
http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/ http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/
8. Other Issues -- check for any issues mentioned in 8. Other Issues -- check for any issues mentioned in
http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html that are not covered http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html that are not covered
elsewhere. elsewhere.
9. Technical Content -- review the actual technical content for 9. Technical Content -- review the actual technical content for
compliance with the guidelines in this document. The use of a compliance with the guidelines in this document. The use of a
YANG module compiler is recommended when checking for syntax YANG module compiler is recommended when checking for syntax
errors; see [YANG tool URL TBD] for more information. Checking errors, [ed.: online YANG validation tool URL TBD]. Checking for
for correct syntax, however, is only part of the job. It is just correct syntax, however, is only part of the job. It is just as
as important to actually read the YANG module document from the important to actually read the YANG module document from the
point of view of a potential implementor. It is particularly point of view of a potential implementor. It is particularly
important to check that description statements are sufficiently important to check that description statements are sufficiently
clear and unambiguous to allow interoperable implementations to clear and unambiguous to allow interoperable implementations to
be created. be created.
Appendix B. YANG Module Template Appendix B. YANG Module Template
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-template.yang" <CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-template@2010-05-18.yang"
module ietf-template { module ietf-template {
// replace this string with a unique namespace URN value // replace this string with a unique namespace URN value
namespace namespace
"urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template:DRAFT-02"; "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-template";
// replace this string, and try to pick a unique prefix // replace this string, and try to pick a unique prefix
prefix "temp"; prefix "temp";
// import statements here: e.g., // import statements here: e.g.,
// import ietf-yang-types { prefix yang; } // import ietf-yang-types { prefix yang; }
// import ietf-inet-types { prefix inet; } // import ietf-inet-types { prefix inet; }
// identify the IETF working group if applicable // identify the IETF working group if applicable
organization organization
skipping to change at page 25, line 20 skipping to change at page 26, line 20
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX; see This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX; see
the RFC itself for full legal notices."; the RFC itself for full legal notices.";
// RFC Ed.: replace XXXX with actual RFC number and remove this note // RFC Ed.: replace XXXX with actual RFC number and remove this note
reference "RFC XXXX"; reference "RFC XXXX";
// RFC Ed.: remove this note // RFC Ed.: remove this note
// Note: extracted from draft-ietf-netmod-yang-usage-04.txt // Note: extracted from draft-ietf-netmod-yang-usage-04.txt
// replace YYYY-MM-DD with a real date (year-month-day) // replace '2010-05-18' with the module publication date
// here is an example revision date: 2009-08-12 // The format is (year-month-day)
revision YYYY-MM-DD { revision "2010-05-18" {
description description
"Initial version"; "Initial version";
} }
// extension statements // extension statements
// feature statements // feature statements
// identity statements // identity statements
skipping to change at page 27, line 7 skipping to change at page 28, line 7
// DO NOT put deviation statements in a published module // DO NOT put deviation statements in a published module
} }
<CODE ENDS> <CODE ENDS>
Figure 1 Figure 1
Appendix C. Change Log Appendix C. Change Log
C.1. Changes from 03 to 04 C.1. Changes from 04 to 05
o Changed 'object' terminology to 'data definition'.
o Put XPath guidelines in separate section.
o Clarified XPath usage for XML document order dependencies.
o Updated <CODE BEGINS> guidelines to current conventions.
o Added informative reference for IANA considerations guidelines and
XML registry.
o Updated IANA Considerations section to reserve the ietf-template
module in the YANG Module Name Registry so it cannot be reused
accidently.
o Many other clarifications and fixed typos found in WGLC reviews.
C.2. Changes from 03 to 04
o Removed figure 1 to reduce duplication, just refer to 4741bis o Removed figure 1 to reduce duplication, just refer to 4741bis
draft. draft.
o Fixed bugs and typos found in WGLC reviews. o Fixed bugs and typos found in WGLC reviews.
o Removed some guidelines and referring to YANG draft instead of o Removed some guidelines and referring to YANG draft instead of
duplicating YANG rules here. duplicating YANG rules here.
o Changed security guidelines so they refer to the IETF Trust TLP o Changed security guidelines so they refer to the IETF Trust TLP
skipping to change at page 27, line 31 skipping to change at page 28, line 50
suffix strings are not used. suffix strings are not used.
o Changed some MIB boilerplate so it refers to YANG boilerplate o Changed some MIB boilerplate so it refers to YANG boilerplate
instead. instead.
o Introduced dangling URL reference to online YANG security o Introduced dangling URL reference to online YANG security
guidelines guidelines
http://www.ops.ietf.org/yang-security.html http://www.ops.ietf.org/yang-security.html
Text from Bert Wijnen will be completed soon and posted online, [ed.: Text from Bert Wijnen will be completed soon and posted
and then this URL will be finalized. online, and then this URL will be finalized.]
o Moved reference for identifying the source document inside the o Moved reference for identifying the source document inside the
each revision statement. each revision statement.
o Removed guideline about valid XPath since YANG already requires o Removed guideline about valid XPath since YANG already requires
valid XPath. valid XPath.
o Added guideline that strings should not rely on preservation of o Added guideline that strings should not rely on preservation of
leading and trailing whitespace characters. leading and trailing whitespace characters.
o Relaxed some XPath and anyxml guidelines from SHOULD NOT or MUST o Relaxed some XPath and anyxml guidelines from SHOULD NOT or MUST
NOT to MAY use with caution. NOT to MAY use with caution.
o Updated the TLP text within the example module again. o Updated the TLP text within the example module again.
o Reversed order of change log so most recent entries are first. o Reversed order of change log so most recent entries are first.
C.2. Changes from 02 to 03 C.3. Changes from 02 to 03
o Updated figure 1 to align with 4741bis draft. o Updated figure 1 to align with 4741bis draft.
o Updated guidelines for import-by-revision and include-by-revision. o Updated guidelines for import-by-revision and include-by-revision.
o Added file name to code begins convention in ietf-template module. o Added file name to code begins convention in ietf-template module.
C.3. Changes from 01 to 02 C.4. Changes from 01 to 02
o Updated figure 1 per mailing list comments. o Updated figure 1 per mailing list comments.
o Updated suggested organization to include the working group name. o Updated suggested organization to include the working group name.
o Updated ietf-template.yang to use new organization statement o Updated ietf-template.yang to use new organization statement
value. value.
o Updated Code Component requirements as per new TLP. o Updated Code Component requirements as per new TLP.
o Updated ietf-template.yang to use new Code Component begin and end o Updated ietf-template.yang to use new Code Component begin and end
markers. markers.
o Updated references to the TLP in a couple sections. o Updated references to the TLP in a couple sections.
o Change manager/agent terminology to client/server. o Change manager/agent terminology to client/server.
C.4. Changes from 00 to 01 C.5. Changes from 00 to 01
o Added transport 'TLS' to figure 1. o Added transport 'TLS' to figure 1.
o Added note about RFC 2119 terminology. o Added note about RFC 2119 terminology.
o Corrected URL for instructions to authors. o Corrected URL for instructions to authors.
o Updated namespace procedures section. o Updated namespace procedures section.
o Updated guidelines on module contact, reference, and organization o Updated guidelines on module contact, reference, and organization
 End of changes. 75 change blocks. 
169 lines changed or deleted 239 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.38. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/