Re: [netmod] 6991bis add protocol identities ?

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

Balázs,

I am not sure I fully understand what you are looking for but it
sounds to me like you are looking for an IANA maintained YANG module
rather than a common YANG type (i.e., this may be considered out of
scope for RFC 6991 bis).

By doing this, you will likely face the same problem the crypto types
are facing; having a long list of protocol identities (crypto
identities) does not express that only certain subsets are useful in
certain contexts (a design time subset) and that implementations are
supporting only certain subsets of the subset (an implementation time
subset). I am sure we have a YANG next isssue for the later one, I am
not sure we have one for the first.

/js

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 04:10:05PM +0000, Balázs Lengyel wrote:
> Hello Jurgen,
> 
> I have seen multiple places where protocol identities are needed.
> (Subscribed notifications, draft-mahesh-netconf-https-notif
> <https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-mahesh-netconf-https-notif-00.txt> , 3GPP
> YAMs). Wouldn’t it be a good idea to define these centrally e.g. in 6991bis?
> 
> I know collecting a complete set of protocols would be a problem, but
> defining at least the most important ones centrally, is better than every
> module defining its own identities, enums, strings.
> 
> If we provide these protocol identities, it would also be good to find a way
> to specify, that a YANG module supports only a subset of them not the full
> set going back to X.25 and pigeon based IP.
> 
> Regards Balazs
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 



> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod


-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <https://www.jacobs-university.de/>