< draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-00.txt		draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-01.txt >
	Network Working Group C. Hopps		Network Working Group C. Hopps
	Internet-Draft Deutsche Telekom		Internet-Draft Deutsche Telekom
	Updates: rfc6087bis (if approved) L. Berger		Updates: rfc6087bis (if approved) L. Berger
	Intended status: Standards Track LabN Consulting, L.L.C.		Intended status: Standards Track LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
	Expires: August 29, 2018 D. Bogdanovic		Expires: September 7, 2018 D. Bogdanovic
	February 25, 2018		March 6, 2018
	YANG Module Tags		YANG Module Tags
	draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-00		draft-ietf-netmod-module-tags-01
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document provides for the association of tags with YANG modules.		This document provides for the association of tags with YANG modules.
	The expectation is for such tags to be used to help classify and		The expectation is for such tags to be used to help classify and
	organize modules. A method for defining, reading and writing a		organize modules. A method for defining, reading and writing a
	modules tags is provided, as well as an augmentation to YANG library.		modules tags is provided. Tags may be standardized and assigned
	Tags may be standardized and assigned during module definition;		during module definition; assigned by implementations; or dynamically
	assigned by implementations; or dynamically defined and set by users.		defined and set by users. This document provides guidance to future
	This document provides guidance to future model writers and, as such,		model writers and, as such, this document updates
	this document updates [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis].		[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis].
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	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 August 29, 2018.		This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2018.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2018 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
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	described in the Simplified BSD License.		described in the Simplified BSD License.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
	2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Tag Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. Tag Prefixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4. Tag Prefixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3.1. IETF Standard Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4.1. IETF Standard Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3.2. Vendor Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4.2. Vendor Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3.3. Local Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4.3. Local Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3.4. Reserved Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4.4. Reserved Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		4. Tag Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5. Tag Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		4.1. Module Definition Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5.1. Module Definition Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		4.2. Implementation Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5.2. Implementation Association . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		4.3. Administrative Tagging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5.3. Administrative Tagging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		5. Tags Module Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5.3.1. Resetting Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		5.1. Tags Module Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6. Tags Module Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		5.2. Tags Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6.1. Tags Module Tree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		6. Other Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	6.2. Tags Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		7. Guidelines to Model Writers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	7. Library Augmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		7.1. Define Standard Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	7.1. Library Augmentation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	8. Other Classifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		8.1. YANG Module Tag Prefix Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	9. Guidelines to Model Writers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		8.2. YANG Module IETF Tag Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	9.1. Define Standard Tags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	10.1. YANG Module Tag Prefix Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	10.2. YANG Module IETF Tag Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The use of tags for classification and organization is fairly		The use of tags for classification and organization is fairly
	ubiquitous not only within IETF protocols, but in the internet itself		ubiquitous not only within IETF protocols, but in the internet itself
	(e.g., #hashtags). Tags can be usefully standardized, but they can		(e.g., #hashtags). Tags can be usefully standardized, but they can
	also serve as a non-standardized mechanism available for users to		also serve as a non-standardized mechanism available for users to
	define themselves. Our solution provides for both cases allowing for		define themselves. Our solution provides for both cases allowing for
	the most flexibility. In particular, tags may be standardized as		the most flexibility. In particular, tags may be standardized as
	well as assigned during module definition; assigned by		well as assigned during module definition; assigned by
	implementations; or dynamically defined and set by users.		implementations; or dynamically defined and set by users.
	This document defines two modules. The first module defines a list		This document defines a module which provides a list of module
	of module entries to allow for adding or removing of tags. It also		entries to allow for adding or removing of tags as well as viewing
	defines an RPC to reset a modules tags to the original values. The		the set of tags associated with a module.
	second module defines an augmentation to YANG Library [RFC7895] to
	allow for reading a modules tags.
	This document also defines an IANA registry for tag prefixes as well		This document also defines an IANA registry for tag prefixes as well
	as a set of globally assigned tags.		as a set of globally assigned tags.
	Section 9 provides guidelines for authors of YANG data models. This		Section 7 provides guidelines for authors of YANG data models. This
	section updates [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis].		section updates [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis].
	2. Conventions Used in This Document		2. Conventions Used in This Document
	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].
	Note that lower case versions of these key words are used in section		Note that lower case versions of these key words are used in section
	Section 9 where guidance is provided to future document authors.		Section 7 where guidance is provided to future document authors.
	3. Tag Locations
	Each module has only one logical tag list; however, that tag list may
	be accessed from multiple locations.
	We define two tag list locations. The first location is used for
	configuration and is a top level list of module entries where each
	entry contain the list of tags. The second read-only location is
	through the yang library under the module entry.
	4. Tag Prefixes		3. Tag Prefixes
	All tags have a prefix indicating who owns their definition. An IANA		All tags have a prefix indicating who owns their definition. An IANA
	registry is used to support standardizing tag prefixes. Currently 3		registry is used to support standardizing tag prefixes. Currently 3
	prefixes are defined with all others reserved.		prefixes are defined with all others reserved.
	4.1. IETF Standard Tags		3.1. IETF Standard Tags
	An IETF standard tag is a tag that has the prefix "ietf:". All IETF		An IETF standard tag is a tag that has the prefix "ietf:". All IETF
	standard tags are registered with IANA in a registry defined later in		standard tags are registered with IANA in a registry defined later in
	this document.		this document.
	4.2. Vendor Tags		3.2. Vendor Tags
	A vendor tag is a tag that has the prefix "vendor:". These tags are		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		defined by the vendor that implements the module, and are not
	standardized; however, it is recommended that the vendor consider		standardized; however, it is recommended that the vendor consider
	including extra identification in the tag name to avoid collisions		including extra identification in the tag name to avoid collisions
	(e.g., vendor:super-duper-company:...).		(e.g., vendor:super-duper-company:...).
	4.3. Local Tags		3.3. Local Tags
	A local tag is any tag that has the prefix "local:". These tags are		A local tag is any tag that has the prefix "local:". These tags are
	defined by the local user/administrator and will never be		defined by the local user/administrator and will never be
	standardized.		standardized.
	4.4. Reserved Tags		3.4. Reserved Tags
	Any tag not starting with the prefix "ietf:", "vendor:" or "local:"		Any tag not starting with the prefix "ietf:", "vendor:" or "local:"
	is reserved for future standardization.		is reserved for future standardization.
	5. Tag Management		4. Tag Management
	Tags can become associated with a module in a number of ways. Tags		Tags can become associated with a module in a number of ways. Tags
	may be defined and associated at model design time, at implementation		may be defined and associated at model design time, at implementation
	time, or via user administrative control. As the main consumer of		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		tags are users, users may also remove any tag, no matter how the tag
	became associated with a module.		became associated with a module.
	5.1. Module Definition Association		4.1. Module Definition Association
	A module definition SHOULD indicate a set of tags to be automatically		A module definition SHOULD indicate a set of tags to be automatically
	added by the module implementer. These tags MUST be standard tags		added by the module implementer. These tags MUST be standard tags
	(Section 4.1). This does imply that new modules may also drive the		(Section 3.1). This does imply that new modules may also drive the
	addition of new standard tags to the IANA registry.		addition of new standard tags to the IANA registry.
	5.2. Implementation Association		4.2. Implementation Association
	An implementation MAY include additional tags associated with a		An implementation MAY include additional tags associated with a
	module. These tags may be standard or vendor specific tags.		module. These tags may be standard or vendor specific tags.
	5.3. Administrative Tagging		4.3. Administrative Tagging
	Tags of any kind can be assigned and removed with normal		Tags of any kind can be assigned and removed with normal
	configuration mechanisms. Additionally we define an RPC to reset a		configuration mechanisms.
	module's tag list to the implementation default.
	Implementations MUST ensure that a modules tag list is consistent		Implementations MUST ensure that a modules tag list is consistent
	across any location from which the list is accessible. So if a user		across any location from which the list is accessible. So if a user
	adds a tag through configuration that tag should also be seen when		adds a tag through configuration that tag should also be seen when
	using the yang library augmentation.		using any augmentation that exposes the modules tag list.
	Implementations that do not support the reset rpc statement (whether
	at all, or just for a particular rpc or module) MUST respond with an
	YANG transport protocol-appropriate rpc layer error when such a
	statement is received.
	5.3.1. Resetting Tags
	The "reset-tags" rpc statement is defined to reset a module's tag
	list to the implementation default, i.e. the tags that are present
	based on module definition and any that are added during
	implementation time. This rpc statement takes module identification
	information as input, and provides the list of tags that are present
	after the reset.
	6. Tags Module Structure		5. Tags Module Structure
	6.1. Tags Module Tree		5.1. Tags Module Tree
	The tree associated with the tags module is:		The tree associated with the tags module is:
	module: ietf-module-tags		module: ietf-module-tags
	rpcs:		+--rw module-tags* [name]
	+---x reset-tags		+--rw name yang:yang-identifier
	+---w input		+--rw tag* string
	| +---w name yang:yang-identifier		+--rw masked-tag* string
	| +---w revision? union
	+--ro output
	+--ro tags* string
	6.2. Tags Module		5.2. Tags Module
	<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-module-tags@2017-10-25.yang"		<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-module-tags@2018-03-06.yang"
	module ietf-module-tags {		module ietf-module-tags {
	yang-version "1";		yang-version "1";
	namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags";		namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-module-tags";
	prefix "mtags";		prefix "mtags";
	import ietf-yang-types {		import ietf-yang-types {
	prefix yang;		prefix yang;
	}		}
	import ietf-yang-library {		organization "IETF NetMod Working Group (NetMod)";
	prefix yanglib;
	}
	// meta		contact
	organization "IETF NetMod Working Group (NetMod)";		"NetMod Working Group - <netmod@ietf.org>";
	contact		description
	"NetMod Working Group - <netmod@ietf.org>";		"This module describes a tagging mechanism for yang module.
			Tags may be IANA assigned or privately defined types.";
			revision "2018-03-06" {
	description		description
	"This module describes a tagging mechanism for yang module.		"Initial revision.";
	Tags may be IANA assigned or privately defined types.";		reference "TBD";
			}
	revision "2017-10-25" {
	description
	"Initial revision.";
	reference "TBD";
	}
	grouping module-tags {
	description
	"A grouping that may be used to classify a module.";
	leaf-list tags {
	type string;
	description
	"The module associated tags. See the IANA 'YANG Module Tag
	Prefix' registry for reserved prefixes and the IANA 'YANG
	Module IETF Tag' registry for IETF standard tags";
	}
	}
	grouping yanglib-common-leafs {		list module-tags {
	description		key "name";
	"Common parameters for YANG modules and submodules.
	This definition extract from RFC7895 as it is defined as
	a grouping within a grouping.
	TBD is there a legal way to use a grouping defined within		description
	another grouping without using the parent? If so, should change		"A list of modules and their associated tags";
	to that.";
	leaf name {		leaf name {
	type yang:yang-identifier;		type yang:yang-identifier;
	mandatory true;		mandatory true;
	description		description
	"The YANG module or submodule name.";		"The YANG module or submodule name.";
	}
	leaf revision {
	type union {
	type yanglib:revision-identifier;
	type string { length 0; }
	}
	mandatory true;
	description
	"The YANG module or submodule revision date.
	A zero-length string is used if no revision statement
	is present in the YANG module or submodule.";
	}
	}		}
	list module-tags {		leaf-list tag {
	key "name revision";		type string;
	description
	"A list of modules and their tags";
	uses yanglib-common-leafs; // uses yanglib:common-leafs;
	uses module-tags;
	}
	rpc reset-tags {		description
	description		"A tag associated with the module. See the IANA 'YANG Module
	"Reset a list of tags for a given module to the list of module		Tag Prefix' registry for reserved prefixes and the IANA
	and implementation time defiend tags. It provides the list of		'YANG Module IETF Tag' registry for IETF standard tags.
	tags associated with the module post reset.";
	input {		The operational view of this list will contain all
	uses yanglib-common-leafs; // uses yanglib:common-leafs;		user-configured tags as well as any predefined tags that
	}		have not been masked by the user using the masked-tag leaf
			list below.";
			}
			leaf-list masked-tag {
			type string;
	output {		description
	uses module-tags;		"The list of tags that should not be associated with this
	}		module. This user can remove (mask) predefined tags by
			adding them to this list. It is not an error to add tags to
			this list that are not predefined for the module.";
	}		}
	}		}
	<CODE ENDS>		}
			<CODE ENDS>
	7. Library Augmentation
	A modules tags can also be read using the yang library [RFC7895] if a
	server supports both YANG library and the augmentation defined below.
	If a server supports ietf-module-tags and the YANG library it SHOULD
	also support the ietf-library-tags module.
	The tree associated with the defined augmentation is:
	module: ietf-library-tags
	augment /yanglib:modules-state/yanglib:module:
	+--ro tags* string
	7.1. Library Augmentation Module
	<CODE BEGINS> file "ietf-library-tags@2017-08-12.yang"
	module ietf-library-tags {
	// namespace
	namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-library-tags";
	prefix ylibtags;
	import ietf-yang-library {
	prefix yanglib;
	}
	import ietf-module-tags {
	prefix mtags;
	}
	// meta
	organization "IETF NetMod Working Group (NetMod)";
	contact
	"NetMod Working Group - <netmod@ietf.org>";
	description
	"This module augments ietf-yang-library with searchable
	classfication tags. Tags may be IANA or privately defined
	types.";
	revision "2017-08-12" {
	description
	"Initial revision.";
	reference "RFC TBD";
	}
	augment "/yanglib:modules-state/yanglib:module" {
	description
	"The yang library structure is augmented with a module tags
	list. This allows operators to tag modules regardless of
	whether the modules included tag support or not";
	uses mtags:module-tags;
	}
	}
	<CODE ENDS>
	8. Other Classifications		6. Other Classifications
	It's worth noting that a different yang module classification		It's worth noting that a different yang module classification
	document exists [RFC8199]. That document is classifying modules in		document exists [RFC8199]. That document is classifying modules in
	only a logical manner and does not define tagging or any other		only a logical manner and does not define tagging or any other
	mechanisms. It divides yang modules into 2 categories (service or		mechanisms. It divides yang modules into 2 categories (service or
	element) and then into one of 3 origins: standard, vendor or user.		element) and then into one of 3 origins: standard, vendor or user.
	It does provide a good way to discuss and identify modules in		It does provide a good way to discuss and identify modules in
	general. This document defines standard tags to support [RFC8199]		general. This document defines standard tags to support [RFC8199]
	style classification.		style classification.
	9. Guidelines to Model Writers		7. Guidelines to Model Writers
	This section updates [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis].		This section updates [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis].
	9.1. Define Standard Tags		7.1. Define Standard Tags
	A module SHOULD indicate, in the description statement of the module,		A module SHOULD indicate, in the description statement of the module,
	a set of tags that are to be associated with it. This description		a set of tags that are to be associated with it. This description
	should also include the appropriate conformance statement or		should also include the appropriate conformance statement or
	statements, using [RFC2119] language for each tag.		statements, using [RFC2119] language for each tag.
	module sample-module {		module example-module {
	...		...
	description		description
	"[Text describing the module...]		"[Text describing the module...]
	RFC<this document> TAGS:		RFC<this document> TAGS:
	The following tags MUST be included by an implementation:		The following tags MUST be included by an implementation:
	- ietf:some-required-tag:foo		- ietf:some-required-tag:foo
	- ...		- ...
	The following tags SHOULD be included by an implementation:		The following tags SHOULD be included by an implementation:
	- ietf:some-recommended-tag:bar		- ietf:some-recommended-tag:bar
	skipping to change at page 9, line 51 ¶		skipping to change at page 7, line 29 ¶
	- ...		- ...
	";		";
	...		...
	}		}
	One SHOULD only include conformance text if there will be tags listed		One SHOULD only include conformance text if there will be tags listed
	(i.e., there's no need to indicate an empty set).		(i.e., there's no need to indicate an empty set).
	The module writer may use existing standard tags, or use new tags		The module writer may use existing standard tags, or use new tags
	defined in the model definition, as appropriate. New tags should be		defined in the model definition, as appropriate. New tags should be
	assigned in the IANA registry defined below, see Section 10.2 below.		assigned in the IANA registry defined below, see Section 8.2 below.
	10. IANA Considerations		8. IANA Considerations
	10.1. YANG Module Tag Prefix Registry		8.1. YANG Module Tag Prefix Registry
	This registry allocates tag prefixes. All YANG module tags SHOULD		This registry allocates tag prefixes. All YANG module tags SHOULD
	begin with one of the prefixes in this registry.		begin with one of the prefixes in this registry.
	The allocation policy for this registry is Specification Required		The allocation policy for this registry is Specification Required
	[RFC5226].		[RFC5226].
	The initial values for this registry are as follows.		The initial values for this registry are as follows.
	prefix description		prefix description
	-------- ---------------------------------------------------		-------- ---------------------------------------------------
	ietf: IETF Standard Tag allocated in the IANA YANG Module		ietf: IETF Standard Tag allocated in the IANA YANG Module
	IETF Tag Registry.		IETF Tag Registry.
	vendor: Non-standardized tags allocated by the module implementer.		vendor: Non-standardized tags allocated by the module implementer.
	local: Non-standardized tags allocated by and for the user.		local: Non-standardized tags allocated by and for the user.
	Other SDOs (standard organizations) wishing to standardize their own		Other SDOs (standard organizations) wishing to standardize their own
	set of tags could allocate a top level prefix from this registry.		set of tags could allocate a top level prefix from this registry.
	10.2. YANG Module IETF Tag Registry		8.2. YANG Module IETF Tag Registry
	This registry allocates prefixes that have the standard prefix		This registry allocates prefixes that have the standard prefix
	"ietf:". New values should be well considered and not achievable		"ietf:". New values should be well considered and not achievable
	through a combination of already existing standard tags.		through a combination of already existing standard tags.
	The allocation policy for this registry is IETF Review [RFC5226].		The allocation policy for this registry is IETF Review [RFC5226].
	The initial values for this registry are as follows.		The initial values for this registry are as follows.
	[Editor's note: many of these tags may move to		[Editor's note: many of these tags may move to
	skipping to change at page 12, line 8 ¶		skipping to change at page 9, line 34 ¶
	| | | |		| | | |
	| ietf:signaling | A module representing | [This |		| ietf:signaling | A module representing | [This |
	| | control plane signaling. | document] |		| | control plane signaling. | document] |
	| | | |		| | | |
	| ietf:lmp | A module representing a link | [This |		| ietf:lmp | A module representing a link | [This |
	| | management protocol. | document] |		| | management protocol. | document] |
	+------------------------+------------------------------+-----------+		+------------------------+------------------------------+-----------+
	Table 1: IETF Module Tag Registry		Table 1: IETF Module Tag Registry
	11. References		9. References
	11.1. Normative References		9.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis]		[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis]
	Bierman, A., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG		Bierman, A., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG
	Data Model Documents", draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-18		Data Model Documents", draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6087bis-18
	(work in progress), February 2018.		(work in progress), February 2018.
	[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,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an		[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
	IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226,		IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
	[RFC7895] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "YANG Module
	Library", RFC 7895, DOI 10.17487/RFC7895, June 2016,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7895>.
	[RFC8199] Bogdanovic, D., Claise, B., and C. Moberg, "YANG Module		[RFC8199] Bogdanovic, D., Claise, B., and C. Moberg, "YANG Module
	Classification", RFC 8199, DOI 10.17487/RFC8199, July		Classification", RFC 8199, DOI 10.17487/RFC8199, July
	2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8199>.		2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8199>.
	11.2. Informative References		9.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-device-model]		[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-device-model]
	Lindem, A., Berger, L., Bogdanovic, D., and C. Hopps,		Lindem, A., Berger, L., Bogdanovic, D., and C. Hopps,
	"Network Device YANG Logical Organization", draft-ietf-		"Network Device YANG Logical Organization", draft-ietf-
	rtgwg-device-model-02 (work in progress), March 2017.		rtgwg-device-model-02 (work in progress), March 2017.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Christan Hopps		Christan Hopps
	Deutsche Telekom		Deutsche Telekom
End of changes. 52 change blocks.
	241 lines changed or deleted		110 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/