<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" []>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt"?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="no"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc iprnotified="no"?>
<?rfc strict="yes"?>
<rfc ipr="trust200902"
     category="std"
     docName="draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-10"    updates="8407"
     submissionType="IETF">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="YANG Module Tags">YANG Module Tags</title>
<author initials='C.' surname='Hopps' fullname='Christian Hopps'><organization>LabN Consulting, L.L.C.</organization><address><email>chopps@chopps.org</email></address></author>
<author initials='L.' surname='Berger' fullname='Lou Berger'><organization>LabN Consulting, LLC.</organization><address><email>lberger@labn.net</email></address></author>
<author initials='D.' surname='Bogdanovic' fullname='Dean Bogdanovic'><organization>Volta Networks</organization><address><email>ivandean@gmail.com</email></address></author>  <date/><abstract><t>This document provides for the association of tags with YANG modules.
The expectation is for such tags to be used to help classify and
organize modules. A method for defining, reading and writing a
modules tags is provided. Tags may be registered and assigned
during module definition; assigned by implementations; or dynamically
defined and set by users. This document also provides guidance to
future model writers; as such, this document updates RFC8407.</t></abstract>  </front>  <middle>

<section title="Introduction">
<t>The use of tags for classification and organization is fairly
ubiquitous not only within IETF protocols, but in the internet itself
(e.g., <spanx style='verb'>#hashtags</spanx>). One benefit of using tags for organization over
a rigid structure is that it is more flexible and can more easily
adapt over time as technologies evolve. Tags can be usefully
registered, but they can also serve as a non-registered mechanism
available for users to define themselves. This document provides a
mechanism to define tags and associate them with YANG modules in a
flexible manner. In particular, tags may be registered as well as
assigned during module definition; assigned by implementations; or
dynamically defined and set by users.</t>

<t>This document defines a YANG module <xref target="RFC7950"/> which
provides a list of module entries to allow for adding or removing of
tags as well as viewing the set of tags associated with a module.</t>

<t>This document defines an extension statement to be used to indicate
tags that SHOULD be added by the module implementation automatically
(i.e., outside of configuration).</t>

<t>This document also defines an IANA registry for tag prefixes as well
as a set of globally assigned tags.</t>

<t><xref target="sec-guidelines-to-model-writers"></xref> provides guidelines for authors of YANG
data models.</t>

<t>This document updates <xref target="RFC8407"/>.</t>

<t>The YANG data model in this document conforms to the Network
Management Datastore Architecture defined in <xref target="RFC8342"/>.</t>

<section title="Some possible use cases for YANG module tags">
<t>During this documents's development there were requests for example
uses of module tags. The following are a few example use cases for
tags. This list is certainly not exhaustive.</t>

<t>One example use of tags would be to help filter different discrete
categories of YANG modules supported by a device. For example, if
modules are suitably tagged, then an XPath query can be used to list
all of the vendor modules supported by a device.</t>

<t>Tags can also be used to help coordination when multiple
semi-independent clients are interacting with the same devices. For
example, one management client could mark that some modules should
not be used because they have not been verified to behave correctly,
so that other management clients avoid querying the data associated
with those modules.</t>

<t>Tag classification is useful for users searching module repositories
(e.g., YANG catalog). A query restricted to the 'ietf:routing' module
tag could be used to return only the IETF YANG modules associated
with routing. Without tags, a user would need to know the name of all
the IETF routing protocol YANG modules.</t>

<t>Future management protocol extensions could allow for filtering
queries of configuration or operational state on a server based on
tags. For example, return all operational state related to
system-management.</t>

</section>

<section title="Conventions Used in This Document">
<t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
<xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as
shown here.</t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Tag Values">
<t>All tags SHOULD begin with a prefix indicating who owns their
definition. An IANA registry (<xref target="sec-yang-module-tag-prefixes-registry"></xref>) is
used to support registering tag prefixes. Currently 3 prefixes
are defined. No further structure is imposed by this document on the
value following the registered prefix, and the value can contain any
YANG type 'string' characters except carriage-returns, newlines and
tabs.</t>

<t>Again, except for the conflict-avoiding prefix, this document is not
specifying any structure on (i.e., restricting) the tag values on
purpose. The intent is to avoid arbitrarily restricting the values
that designers, implementers and users can use. As a result of this
choice, designers, implementers, and users are free to add or not
add any structure they may require to their own tag values.</t>

<section title="IETF Tags" anchor="sec-ietf-tags">
<t>An IETF tag is a tag that has the prefix "ietf:". All IETF tags are
registered with IANA in a registry defined later in this document
(<xref target="sec-ietf-yang-module-tags-registry"></xref>).</t>

</section>

<section title="Vendor Tags">
<t>A vendor tag is a tag that has the prefix "vendor:". These tags are
defined by the vendor that implements the module, and are not
registered; however, it is RECOMMENDED that the vendor include
extra identification in the tag to avoid collisions such as using the
enterpise or organization name following the "vendor:" prefix (e.g.,
vendor:example.com:vendor-defined-classifier).</t>

</section>

<section title="User Tags">
<t>A user tag is any tag that has the prefix "user:". These tags are
defined by the user/administrator and are not meant to be registered.
Users are not required to use the "user:" prefix; however, doing so
is RECOMMENDED as it helps avoid collisions.</t>

</section>

<section title="Reserved Tags">
<t>Any tag not starting with the prefix "ietf:", "vendor:" or "user:" is
reserved for future use. These tag values are not invalid, but simply
reserved in the context of specifications (e.g., RFCs).</t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Tag Management">
<t>Tags can become associated with a module in a number of ways. Tags
may be defined and associated at module design time, at
implementation time, or via user administrative control. As the main
consumer of tags are users, users may also remove any tag, no matter
how the tag became associated with a module.</t>

<section title="Module Definition Tagging">
<t>A module definition MAY indicate a set of tags to be added by the
module implementer. These design time tags are indicated using the
module-tag extension statement.</t>

<t>If the module is defined in an IETF standards track document, the
tags MUST be <xref format="counter" target="sec-ietf-tags">IETF Tags</xref>. Thus, new modules can drive the addition of
new IETF tags to the IANA registry defined in <xref target="sec-ietf-yang-module-tags-registry"></xref>, and the IANA registry can serve as a check against
duplication.</t>

</section>

<section title="Implementation Tagging">
<t>An implementation MAY include additional tags associated with a
module. These tags SHOULD be IETF Tags (i.e., registered) or vendor
specific tags.</t>

</section>

<section title="User Tagging">
<t>Tags of any kind, with or without a prefix, can be assigned and
removed by the user using normal configuration mechanisms. In order
to remove a tag from the operational datastore the user adds a
matching <spanx style='verb'>masked-tag</spanx> entry for a given module.</t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Tags Module Structure">
<section title="Tags Module Tree">
<t>The tree associated with the "ietf-module-tags" module follows. The
meaning of the symbols can be found in <xref target="RFC8340"/>.</t>

<figure title="YANG Module Tags Tree Diagram" anchor="sec-yang-module-tags-tree-diagram"><artwork><![CDATA[
    module: ietf-module-tags
      +--rw module-tags
         +--rw module* [name]
            +--rw name          yang:yang-identifier
            +--rw tag*          tag
            +--rw masked-tag*   tag
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>

<section title="YANG Module">
<figure title="Module Tags Module" anchor="sec-module-tags-module"><artwork><![CDATA[
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-module-tags@2020-02-29.yang"
module ietf-module-tags {
  yang-version 1.1;
  namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags";
  prefix tags;

  import ietf-yang-types {
    prefix yang;
  }

  organization
    "IETF NetMod Working Group (NetMod)";
  contact
    "WG Web:  <https://tools.ietf.org/wg/netmod/>
     WG List: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>

     Author: Christian Hopps
	     <mailto:chopps@chopps.org>

     Author: Lou Berger
	     <mailto:lberger@labn.net>

     Author: Dean Bogdanovic
	     <ivandean@gmail.com>";

  // RFC Ed.: replace XXXX with actual RFC number and
  // remove this note.

  description
    "This module describes a mechanism associating tags with YANG
     modules. Tags may be IANA assigned or privately defined.

     Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
     authors of the code.  All rights reserved.

     Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
     without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to
     the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set
     forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
     Relating to IETF Documents
     (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).

     This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX
     (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself
     for full legal notices.

     The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL', 'SHALL
     NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'NOT RECOMMENDED',
     'MAY', and 'OPTIONAL' in this document are to be interpreted as
     described in BCP 14 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when,
     they appear in all capitals, as shown here.";

  // RFC Ed.: update the date below with the date of RFC publication
  // and RFC number and remove this note.

  revision 2020-02-29 {
    description
      "Initial revision.";
    reference "RFC XXXX: YANG Module Tags";
  }

  typedef tag {
    type string {
      length "1..max";
      pattern '[\S ]+';
    }
    description
      "A tag is a type 'string' value that does not include carriage
       return, newline or tab characters. It SHOULD begin with a
       registered prefix; however, tags without a registered prefix
       SHOULD NOT be treated as invalid.";
  }

  extension module-tag {
    argument tag;
    description
      "The argument 'tag' is of type 'tag'. This extension statement
       is used by module authors to indicate the tags that SHOULD be
       added automatically by the system. As such the origin of the
       value for the pre-defined tags should be set to 'system'
       [RFC8342].";
  }

  container module-tags {
    description
      "Contains the list of modules and their associated tags";
    list module {
      key "name";
      description
	"A list of modules and their associated tags";
      leaf name {
	type yang:yang-identifier;
	mandatory true;
	description
	  "The YANG module name.";
      }
      leaf-list tag {
	type tag;
	description
	  "Tags associated with the module. See the IANA 'YANG Module
	   Tag Prefixes' registry for reserved prefixes and the IANA
	   'IETF YANG Module Tags' registry for IETF tags.

	   The 'operational' state [RFC8342] view of this list is
	   constructed using the following steps:

	   1) System tags (i.e., tags of 'system' origin) are added.
	   2) User configured tags (i.e., tags of 'intended' origin)
	   are added.
	   3) Any tag that is equal to a masked-tag is removed.";
      }
      leaf-list masked-tag {
	type tag;
	description
	  "The list of tags that should not be associated with this
	   module. The user can remove (mask) tags from the
	   operational state datastore [RFC8342] by adding them to
	   this list. It is not an error to add tags to this list
	   that are not associated with the module, but they have no
	   operational effect.";
      }
    }
  }
}
<CODE ENDS>
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Other Classifications">
<t>It is worth noting that a different YANG module classification
document exists <xref target="RFC8199"/>. That document only classifies modules in a
logical manner and does not define tagging or any other mechanisms.
It divides YANG modules into two categories (service or element) and
then into one of three origins: standard, vendor or user. It does
provide a good way to discuss and identify modules in general. This
document defines IETF tags to support <xref target="RFC8199"/> style
classification.</t>

</section>

<section title="Guidelines to Model Writers" anchor="sec-guidelines-to-model-writers">
<t>This section updates <xref target="RFC8407"/>.</t>

<section title="Define Standard Tags">
<t>A module MAY indicate, using module-tag extension statements, a set
of tags that are to be automatically associated with it (i.e., not
added through configuration).</t>

<figure><artwork><![CDATA[
module example-module {
  //...
  import module-tags { prefix tags; }

  tags:module-tag "ietf:some-new-tag";
  tags:module-tag "ietf:some-other-tag";
  // ...
}
]]></artwork></figure>

<t>The module writer can use existing standard tags, or use new tags
defined in the model definition, as appropriate. For IETF
standardized modules new tags MUST be assigned in the IANA registry
defined below, see <xref target="sec-ietf-yang-module-tags-registry"></xref>.</t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="IANA Considerations">
<section title="YANG Module Tag Prefixes Registry" anchor="sec-yang-module-tag-prefixes-registry">
<t>IANA is asked to create a new registry "YANG Module Tag Prefixes"
grouped under a new "Protocol" category named "YANG Module Tags".</t>

<t>This registry allocates tag prefixes. All YANG module tags SHOULD
begin with one of the prefixes in this registry.</t>

<t>Prefix entries in this registry should be short strings consisting of
lowercase ASCII alpha-numeric characters and a final ":" character.</t>

<t>The allocation policy for this registry is Specification Required
<xref target="RFC8126"/>. The Reference and Assignee values should be sufficient to
identify and contact the organization that has been allocated the
prefix.</t>

<t>The initial values for this registry are as follows.</t>

<texttable>
<ttcol>Prefix</ttcol><ttcol>Description</ttcol><ttcol>Reference</ttcol><ttcol>Assignee</ttcol>
<c>ietf:</c><c>IETF Tags allocated in the IANA IETF YANG Module Tags registry.</c><c>[This document]</c><c>IETF</c>
<c>vendor:</c><c>Non-registered tags allocated by the module implementer.</c><c>[This document]</c><c>IETF</c>
<c>user:</c><c>Non-registered tags allocated by and for the user.</c><c>[This document]</c><c>IETF</c>
</texttable>

<t>Other standards organizations (SDOs) wishing to allocate their own
set of tags should allocate a prefix from this registry.</t>

</section>

<section title="IETF YANG Module Tags Registry" anchor="sec-ietf-yang-module-tags-registry">
<t>IANA is asked to create a new registry "IETF YANG Module Tags" grouped
under a new "Protocol" category "IETF YANG Module Tags". This registry
should be included below "YANG Module Tag Prefixes" when listed on
the same page.</t>

<t>This registry allocates tags that have the registered prefix "ietf:".
New values should be well considered and not achievable through a
combination of already existing IETF tags. IANA assigned tags must
conform to Net-Unicode as defined in <xref target="RFC5198"/> and they shall not need
normalization.</t>

<t>The allocation policy for this registry is IETF Review <xref target="RFC8126"/>.</t>

<t>The initial values for this registry are as follows.</t>

<texttable>
<ttcol>Tag</ttcol><ttcol>Description</ttcol><ttcol>Reference</ttcol>
<c>ietf:network-element-class</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/> network element.</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/></c>
<c>ietf:network-service-class</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/> network service.</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/></c>
<c>ietf:sdo-defined-class</c><c>Module is defined by a standards organization.</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/></c>
<c>ietf:vendor-defined-class</c><c>Module is defined by a vendor.</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/></c>
<c>ietf:user-defined-class</c><c>Module is defined by the user.</c><c><xref target="RFC8199"/></c>
<c>ietf:hardware</c><c>Relates to hardware (e.g., inventory).</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:software</c><c>Relates to software (e.g., installed OS).</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:protocol</c><c>Represents a protocol (often combined with another tag to refine).</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:qos</c><c>Relates to quality of service.</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:network-service-app</c><c>Relates to a network service application (e.g., an NTP server, DNS server, DHCP server, etc).</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:system-management</c><c>Relates to system management (e.g., a system management protocol such as syslog, TACAC+, SNMP, netconf, ...).</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:oam</c><c>Relates to Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (e.g., BFD).</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:routing</c><c>Relates to routing.</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:security</c><c>Related to security.</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:signaling</c><c>Relates to control plane signaling.</c><c>[This document]</c>
<c>ietf:link-management</c><c>Relates to link management.</c><c>[This document]</c>
</texttable>

</section>

<section title="Updates to the IETF XML Registry">
<t>This document registers a URI in the "IETF XML Registry" <xref target="RFC3688"/>.
Following the format in <xref target="RFC3688"/>, the following registrations have been
made:</t>

<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="URI:"><vspace/>urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags</t>
<t hangText="Registrant Contact:"><vspace/>The IESG.</t>
<t hangText="XML:"><vspace/>N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.</t>

<t hangText="URI:"><vspace/>urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags-state</t>
<t hangText="Registrant Contact:"><vspace/>The IESG.</t>
<t hangText="XML:"><vspace/>N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.</t>
</list></t>

</section>

<section title="Updates to the YANG Module Names Registry">
<t>This document registers two YANG modules in the "YANG Module Names"
registry <xref target="RFC6020"/>. Following the format in <xref target="RFC6020"/>, the following
registration have been made:</t>

<t><list style="hanging">
<t hangText="name:"><vspace/>ietf-module-tags</t>
<t hangText="namespace:"><vspace/>urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags</t>
<t hangText="prefix:"><vspace/>tags</t>
<t hangText="reference:"><vspace/>RFC XXXX (RFC Ed.: replace XXX with actual RFC number and remove this note.)</t>

<t hangText="name:"><vspace/>ietf-module-tags-state</t>
<t hangText="namespace:"><vspace/>urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags-state</t>
<t hangText="prefix:"><vspace/>tags</t>
<t hangText="reference:"><vspace/>RFC XXXX (RFC Ed.: replace XXX with actual RFC number and remove this note.)</t>
</list></t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Security Considerations">
<t>The YANG module defined in this memo is designed to be accessed via
the NETCONF protocol <xref target="RFC6241"/>. The lowest NETCONF layer is the
secure transport layer and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is SSH <xref target="RFC6242"/>.</t>

<t>This document adds the ability to associate tag meta-data with YANG
modules. This document does not define any actions based on these
associations, and none are yet defined, and therefore it does not
by itself introduce any new security considerations directly.</t>

<t>Users of the tag-meta data may define various actions to be taken
based on the tag meta-data. These actions and their definitions are
outside the scope of this document. Users will need to consider the
security implications of any actions they choose to define,
including the potential for a tag to get 'masked' by another user.</t>

</section>

</middle>
<back>
<references title="Normative References">


<reference  anchor='RFC2119' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119'>
<front>
<title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
<author initials='S.' surname='Bradner' fullname='S. Bradner'><organization /></author>
<date year='1997' month='March' />
<abstract><t>In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification.  These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents.  This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='BCP' value='14'/>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='2119'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC2119'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC7950' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950'>
<front>
<title>The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Bjorklund' fullname='M. Bjorklund' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<date year='2016' month='August' />
<abstract><t>YANG is a data modeling language used to model configuration data, state data, Remote Procedure Calls, and notifications for network management protocols.  This document describes the syntax and semantics of version 1.1 of the YANG language.  YANG version 1.1 is a maintenance release of the YANG language, addressing ambiguities and defects in the original specification.  There are a small number of backward incompatibilities from YANG version 1.  This document also specifies the YANG mappings to the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF).</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='7950'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC7950'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC8126' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126'>
<front>
<title>Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Cotton' fullname='M. Cotton'><organization /></author>
<author initials='B.' surname='Leiba' fullname='B. Leiba'><organization /></author>
<author initials='T.' surname='Narten' fullname='T. Narten'><organization /></author>
<date year='2017' month='June' />
<abstract><t>Many protocols make use of points of extensibility that use constants to identify various protocol parameters.  To ensure that the values in these fields do not have conflicting uses and to promote interoperability, their allocations are often coordinated by a central record keeper.  For IETF protocols, that role is filled by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).</t><t>To make assignments in a given registry prudently, guidance describing the conditions under which new values should be assigned, as well as when and how modifications to existing values can be made, is needed.  This document defines a framework for the documentation of these guidelines by specification authors, in order to assure that the provided guidance for the IANA Considerations is clear and addresses the various issues that are likely in the operation of a registry.</t><t>This is the third edition of this document; it obsoletes RFC 5226.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='BCP' value='26'/>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8126'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8126'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC8174' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174'>
<front>
<title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
<author initials='B.' surname='Leiba' fullname='B. Leiba'><organization /></author>
<date year='2017' month='May' />
<abstract><t>RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol  specifications.  This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the  defined special meanings.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='BCP' value='14'/>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8174'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8174'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC8342' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342'>
<front>
<title>Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA)</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Bjorklund' fullname='M. Bjorklund'><organization /></author>
<author initials='J.' surname='Schoenwaelder' fullname='J. Schoenwaelder'><organization /></author>
<author initials='P.' surname='Shafer' fullname='P. Shafer'><organization /></author>
<author initials='K.' surname='Watsen' fullname='K. Watsen'><organization /></author>
<author initials='R.' surname='Wilton' fullname='R. Wilton'><organization /></author>
<date year='2018' month='March' />
<abstract><t>Datastores are a fundamental concept binding the data models written in the YANG data modeling language to network management protocols such as the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) and RESTCONF. This document defines an architectural framework for datastores based on the experience gained with the initial simpler model, addressing requirements that were not well supported in the initial model.  This document updates RFC 7950.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8342'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8342'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC8199' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8199'>
<front>
<title>YANG Module Classification</title>
<author initials='D.' surname='Bogdanovic' fullname='D. Bogdanovic'><organization /></author>
<author initials='B.' surname='Claise' fullname='B. Claise'><organization /></author>
<author initials='C.' surname='Moberg' fullname='C. Moberg'><organization /></author>
<date year='2017' month='July' />
<abstract><t>The YANG data modeling language is currently being considered for a wide variety of applications throughout the networking industry at large.  Many standards development organizations (SDOs), open-source software projects, vendors, and users are using YANG to develop and publish YANG modules for a wide variety of applications.  At the same time, there is currently no well-known terminology to categorize various types of YANG modules.</t><t>A consistent terminology would help with the categorization of YANG modules, assist in the analysis of the YANG data modeling efforts in the IETF and other organizations, and bring clarity to the YANG- related discussions between the different groups.</t><t>This document describes a set of concepts and associated terms to support consistent classification of YANG modules.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8199'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8199'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC8407' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8407'>
<front>
<title>Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models</title>
<author initials='A.' surname='Bierman' fullname='A. Bierman'><organization /></author>
<date year='2018' month='October' />
<abstract><t>This memo provides guidelines for authors and reviewers of specifications containing YANG modules.  Recommendations and procedures are defined, which are intended to increase interoperability and usability of Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) and RESTCONF protocol implementations that utilize YANG modules.  This document obsoletes RFC 6087.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='BCP' value='216'/>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8407'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8407'/>
</reference>
</references>
<references title="Informative References">


<reference  anchor='RFC3688' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688'>
<front>
<title>The IETF XML Registry</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Mealling' fullname='M. Mealling'><organization /></author>
<date year='2004' month='January' />
<abstract><t>This document describes an IANA maintained registry for IETF standards which use Extensible Markup Language (XML) related items such as Namespaces, Document Type Declarations (DTDs), Schemas, and Resource Description Framework (RDF) Schemas.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='BCP' value='81'/>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='3688'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC3688'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC5198' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5198'>
<front>
<title>Unicode Format for Network Interchange</title>
<author initials='J.' surname='Klensin' fullname='J. Klensin'><organization /></author>
<author initials='M.' surname='Padlipsky' fullname='M. Padlipsky'><organization /></author>
<date year='2008' month='March' />
<abstract><t>The Internet today is in need of a standardized form for the transmission of internationalized &quot;text&quot; information, paralleling the specifications for the use of ASCII that date from the early days of the ARPANET.  This document specifies that format, using UTF-8 with normalization and specific line-ending sequences.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='5198'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC5198'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC6020' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6020'>
<front>
<title>YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Bjorklund' fullname='M. Bjorklund' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<date year='2010' month='October' />
<abstract><t>YANG is a data modeling language used to model configuration and state data manipulated by the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF), NETCONF remote procedure calls, and NETCONF notifications. [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6020'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC6020'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC6241' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241'>
<front>
<title>Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)</title>
<author initials='R.' surname='Enns' fullname='R. Enns' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<author initials='M.' surname='Bjorklund' fullname='M. Bjorklund' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<author initials='J.' surname='Schoenwaelder' fullname='J. Schoenwaelder' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<author initials='A.' surname='Bierman' fullname='A. Bierman' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<date year='2011' month='June' />
<abstract><t>The Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) defined in this document provides mechanisms to install, manipulate, and delete the configuration of network devices.  It uses an Extensible Markup Language (XML)-based data encoding for the configuration data as well as the protocol messages.  The NETCONF protocol operations are realized as remote procedure calls (RPCs).  This document obsoletes RFC 4741.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6241'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC6241'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC6242' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242'>
<front>
<title>Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure Shell (SSH)</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Wasserman' fullname='M. Wasserman'><organization /></author>
<date year='2011' month='June' />
<abstract><t>This document describes a method for invoking and running the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF) within a Secure Shell (SSH) session as an SSH subsystem.  This document obsoletes RFC 4742.  [STANDARDS-TRACK]</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='6242'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC6242'/>
</reference>


<reference  anchor='RFC8340' target='https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340'>
<front>
<title>YANG Tree Diagrams</title>
<author initials='M.' surname='Bjorklund' fullname='M. Bjorklund'><organization /></author>
<author initials='L.' surname='Berger' fullname='L. Berger' role='editor'><organization /></author>
<date year='2018' month='March' />
<abstract><t>This document captures the current syntax used in YANG module tree diagrams.  The purpose of this document is to provide a single location for this definition.  This syntax may be updated from time to time based on the evolution of the YANG language.</t></abstract>
</front>
<seriesInfo name='BCP' value='215'/>
<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='8340'/>
<seriesInfo name='DOI' value='10.17487/RFC8340'/>
</reference>
</references>

<section title="Examples">
<t>The following is a fictional NETCONF example result from a query of
the module tags list. For the sake of brevity only a few module
results are imagined.</t>

<figure title="Example NETCONF Query Output" anchor="sec-example-netconf-query-output"><artwork><![CDATA[
<ns0:data xmlns:ns0="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0">
  <t:module-tags xmlns:t="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags">
    <t:module>
      <t:name>ietf-bfd</t:name>
      <t:tag>ietf:network-element-class</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:oam</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:protocol</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:sdo-defined-class</t:tag>
    </t:module>
    <t:module>
      <t:name>ietf-isis</t:name>
      <t:tag>ietf:network-element-class</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:protocol</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:sdo-defined-class</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:routing</t:tag>
    </t:module>
    <t:module>
      <t:name>ietf-ssh-server</t:name>
      <t:tag>ietf:network-element-class</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:protocol</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:sdo-defined-class</t:tag>
      <t:tag>ietf:system-management</t:tag>
    </t:module>
  </t:module-tags>
</ns0:data>
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>

<section title="Acknowledgements">
<t>Special thanks to Robert Wilton for his help improving the
introduction and providing the example use cases, as well as
generating the non-NMDA module.</t>

</section>

<section title="Non-NMDA State Module.">
<t>As per <xref target="RFC8407"/> the following is a non-NMDA module to support
viewing the operational state for non-NMDA compliant servers.</t>

<figure title="Non-NMDA Module Tags State Module" anchor="sec-non-nmda-module-tags-state-module"><artwork><![CDATA[
<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-module-tags-state@2020-02-29.yang"
module ietf-module-tags-state {
  yang-version 1.1;
  namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags-state";
  prefix tags-s;

  import ietf-yang-types {
    prefix yang;
  }
  import ietf-module-tags {
    prefix tags;
  }

  organization
    "IETF NetMod Working Group (NetMod)";
  contact
    "WG Web:  <https://tools.ietf.org/wg/netmod/>
     WG List: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>

     Author: Christian Hopps
	     <mailto:chopps@chopps.org>

     Author: Lou Berger
	     <mailto:lberger@labn.net>

     Author: Dean Bogdanovic
	     <ivandean@gmail.com>";

  // RFC Ed.: replace XXXX with actual RFC number and
  // remove this note.

  description
    "This module describes a mechanism associating tags with YANG
     modules. Tags may be IANA assigned or privately defined.

     This is a temporary non-NMDA module that is for use by
     implementations that don't yet support NMDA.

     Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
     authors of the code.  All rights reserved.

     Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
     without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to
     the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set
     forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
     Relating to IETF Documents
     (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).

     This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX
     (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself
     for full legal notices.

     The key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED', 'SHALL', 'SHALL
     NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'NOT RECOMMENDED',
     'MAY', and 'OPTIONAL' in this document are to be interpreted as
     described in BCP 14 (RFC 2119) (RFC 8174) when, and only when,
     they appear in all capitals, as shown here.";

  // RFC Ed.: update the date below with the date of RFC publication
  // and RFC number and remove this note.

  revision 2020-02-29 {
    description
      "Initial revision.";
    reference
      "RFC XXXX: YANG Module Tags";
  }

  container module-tags-state {
    config false;
    status deprecated;
    description
      "Contains the list of modules and their associated tags";
    list module {
      key "name";
      status deprecated;
      description
	"A list of modules and their associated tags";
      leaf name {
	type yang:yang-identifier;
	mandatory true;
	status deprecated;
	description
	  "The YANG module name.";
      }
      leaf-list tag {
	type tags:tag;
	status deprecated;
	description
	  "Tags associated with the module. See the IANA 'YANG Module
	   Tag Prefixes' registry for reserved prefixes and the IANA
	   'IETF YANG Module Tags' registry for IETF tags.

	   The contents of this list is constructed using the
	   following steps:

	   1) System tags (i.e., tags of added by the system) are added.
	   2) User configured tags (i.e., tags added by configuration)
	   are added.
	   3) Any tag that is equal to a masked-tag present in the
	   corresponding ietf-module-tags:module-tags:module-tag leaf
	   list for this module is removed.";
      }
    }
  }
}
<CODE ENDS>
]]></artwork></figure>

</section>
  </back>
</rfc>
