| < draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-07.txt | draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-08.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group D. Kumar | Network Working Group D. Kumar | |||
| Internet-Draft Cisco | Internet-Draft Cisco | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track M. Wang | Intended status: Standards Track M. Wang | |||
| Expires: March 19, 2018 Q. Wu | Expires: March 24, 2018 Q. Wu | |||
| Huawei | Huawei | |||
| R. Rahman | R. Rahman | |||
| S. Raghavan | S. Raghavan | |||
| Cisco | Cisco | |||
| September 15, 2017 | September 20, 2017 | |||
| Retrieval Methods YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, | Retrieval Methods YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, | |||
| Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols | Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols | |||
| draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-07 | draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods-08 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document presents a retrieval method YANG Data model for | This document presents a retrieval method YANG Data model for | |||
| connectionless OAM protocols. It provides technology-independent RPC | connectionless OAM protocols. It provides technology-independent RPC | |||
| operations for connectionless OAM protocols. The retrieval methods | operations for connectionless OAM protocols. The retrieval methods | |||
| model presented here can be extended to include technology specific | model presented here can be extended to include technology specific | |||
| details. This is leading to uniformity between OAM protocols and | details. This is leading to uniformity between OAM protocols and | |||
| support both nested OAM workflows (i.e., performing OAM functions at | support both nested OAM workflows (i.e., performing OAM functions at | |||
| different levels through a unified interface) and interacting OAM | different levels through a unified interface) and interacting OAM | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 44 ¶ | |||
| 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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://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 March 19, 2018. | This Internet-Draft will expire on March 24, 2018. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2017 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 | |||
| (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://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 18, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 46 ¶ | |||
| base status-sub-code; | base status-sub-code; | |||
| } | } | |||
| mandatory true; | mandatory true; | |||
| description | description | |||
| "Sub code for Path Discovery message. For example Sub code in | "Sub code for Path Discovery message. For example Sub code in | |||
| ICMPv6 Parameter Problem Message includes: | ICMPv6 Parameter Problem Message includes: | |||
| 1-Erroneous header field encountered | 1-Erroneous header field encountered | |||
| 2-Unrecognized Next Header type encountered | 2-Unrecognized Next Header type encountered | |||
| 3-Unrecognized IPv6 option encountered "; | 3-Unrecognized IPv6 option encountered "; | |||
| } | } | |||
| description | ||||
| "List of Error code and Sub Code for Path Discovery."; | ||||
| } | } | |||
| uses coam:path-discovery-data; | uses coam:path-discovery-data; | |||
| } | } | |||
| } | } | |||
| } | ||||
| <CODE ENDS> | <CODE ENDS> | |||
| 5. Security Considerations | 5. Security Considerations | |||
| The YANG module defined in this document is designed to be accessed | The YANG module defined in this document is designed to be accessed | |||
| via network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or | via network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or | |||
| RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer is the secure transport | RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer is the secure transport | |||
| layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is Secure | layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is Secure | |||
| Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the | Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the | |||
| mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC5246]. | mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC5246]. | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 16 ¶ | skipping to change at page 20, line 16 ¶ | |||
| reference: RFC XXXX | reference: RFC XXXX | |||
| 7. References | 7. References | |||
| 7.1. Normative References | 7.1. Normative References | |||
| [I-D.ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam] | [I-D.ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam] | |||
| Kumar, D., Wang, Z., Wu, Q., Rahman, R., and S. Raghavan, | Kumar, D., Wang, Z., Wu, Q., Rahman, R., and S. Raghavan, | |||
| "Generic YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, | "Generic YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, | |||
| Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols", draft- | Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols", draft- | |||
| ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-09 (work in progress), | ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-10 (work in progress), | |||
| August 2017. | September 2017. | |||
| [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, | [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, | DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>. | |||
| [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security | [RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security | |||
| (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, | (TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008, | DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5246>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 21, line 18 ¶ | |||
| [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF | [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF | |||
| Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, | Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>. | |||
| 7.2. Informative References | 7.2. Informative References | |||
| [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-push] | [I-D.ietf-netconf-yang-push] | |||
| Clemm, A., Voit, E., Prieto, A., Tripathy, A., Nilsen- | Clemm, A., Voit, E., Prieto, A., Tripathy, A., Nilsen- | |||
| Nygaard, E., Bierman, A., and B. Lengyel, "Subscribing to | Nygaard, E., Bierman, A., and B. Lengyel, "Subscribing to | |||
| YANG datastore push updates", draft-ietf-netconf-yang- | YANG datastore push updates", draft-ietf-netconf-yang- | |||
| push-08 (work in progress), August 2017. | push-09 (work in progress), September 2017. | |||
| [RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, Ed., "Internet | [RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, Ed., "Internet | |||
| Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet | Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet | |||
| Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 89, | Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 89, | |||
| RFC 4443, DOI 10.17487/RFC4443, March 2006, | RFC 4443, DOI 10.17487/RFC4443, March 2006, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4443>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4443>. | |||
| [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection | [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection | |||
| (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, | (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 23, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 23, line 28 ¶ | |||
| identity ipfix-export { | identity ipfix-export { | |||
| base export-method; | base export-method; | |||
| description | description | |||
| "IPFIX based export. Configuration provided separately."; | "IPFIX based export. Configuration provided separately."; | |||
| } | } | |||
| identity yang-push-export { | identity yang-push-export { | |||
| base export-method; | base export-method; | |||
| description | description | |||
| "Yang-push from draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push"; | "Yang-push from draft-ietf-netconf-yang-push"; | |||
| } | } | |||
| identity status-code{ | ||||
| description | ||||
| "Base status code"; | ||||
| } | ||||
| identity invalid-cc{ | ||||
| base status-code; | ||||
| description | ||||
| "Indicates that the Continuity check message is invalid"; | ||||
| } | ||||
| identity invalid-pd { | ||||
| base status-code; | ||||
| description | ||||
| "Indicates that the path discovery message is invalid"; | ||||
| } | ||||
| identity status-sub-code { | ||||
| description | ||||
| "Base status sub code"; | ||||
| } | ||||
| typedef export-method { | typedef export-method { | |||
| type identityref { | type identityref { | |||
| base export-method; | base export-method; | |||
| } | } | |||
| description | description | |||
| "Export method type."; | "Export method type."; | |||
| } | } | |||
| typedef change-type { | typedef change-type { | |||
| type enumeration { | type enumeration { | |||
| enum "create" { | enum "create" { | |||
| description | description | |||
| "Change due to a create."; | "Change due to a create."; | |||
| } | } | |||
| End of changes. 10 change blocks. | ||||
| 9 lines changed or deleted | 30 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||