Internet-Draft YANG Module Names April 2025
Bierman, et al. Expires 21 October 2025 [Page]
Workgroup:
Network Modeling
Internet-Draft:
draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020-iana-update-latest
Updates:
6020 (if approved)
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
A. Bierman
YumaWorks
M. Boucadair, Ed.
Orange
Q. Wu
Huawei

Update to YANG Module Names Registration

Abstract

This document amends the IANA guidance on the uniqueness of YANG module and submodule names.

The document updates RFC 6020 to clarify how modules and their revisions are handled by IANA.

Discussion Venues

This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

Discussion of this document takes place on the Network Modeling Working Group mailing list (netmod@ietf.org), which is archived at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/.

Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at https://github.com/boucadair/rfc8407bis.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 October 2025.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

[RFC6020] defines a registry for YANG module and submodule names, called "YANG Module Names" [IANA-MOD-NAMES].

Specifically, IANA considerations to register YANG module and submodule names are specified in Section 14 of [RFC6020]. These considerations require that all module and submodule names in the registry must be unique. However, the practice followed by IANA is not consistent with that guidance.

This document amends the guidance on the uniqueness of names (Section 14 of [RFC6020]) to comply with the IANA practices for registering modules and their revisions.

2. Requirements Notation

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 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

3. IANA Considerations

3.1. Update YANG Parameters Registry

This document requests IANA to update the reference for the "YANG Module Names" registry under the "YANG Parameters" registry group [IANA-MOD-NAMES] to point to the RFC number that will be assigned to this document.

3.2. Revisions of Published Modules

This document amends the guidance on the uniqueness of names, initially defined in Section 14 of [RFC6020], as follows:

OLD:

All module and submodule names in the registry MUST be unique.

All XML namespaces in the registry MUST be unique.

NEW:

Modules and their revisions are maintained in the registry.

All initial version module and submodule names in the registry MUST be unique.

All XML namespaces of initial version modules in the registry MUST be unique.

All modules and submodules revisions MUST have the same name as the one in the initial version of the module and submodule.

All module revisions MUST have the same XML namespace as the initial version of the module.

4. Security Considerations

This document defines an update to an IANA registration procedure defined in [RFC6020]. It does not introduce any new or increased security risks that need to be discussed.

5. References

5.1. Normative References

[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.
[RFC6020]
Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6020>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.

5.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis]
Bierman, A., Boucadair, M., and Q. Wu, "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of Documents Containing YANG Data Models", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-23, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis-23>.
[IANA-MOD-NAMES]
IANA, "YANG Module Names", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/yang-parameters/>.

Acknowledgments

The content of this document was part of [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis].

Mahesh Jethanandani suggested to offload this part from [I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc8407bis]. Thanks to Mahesh for the discussion and comments.

Authors' Addresses

Andy Bierman
YumaWorks
United States of America
Mohamed Boucadair (editor)
Orange
France
Qin Wu
Huawei
China