Re: [Rats] Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module draft

[Schönwälder, Jürgen <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 04:22:47PM +0800, Michael Richardson wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2019-11-12 3:52 a.m., Laurence Lundblade wrote:
> > One more note on this. It seems wrong-headed to try express claims in
> > YANG. To do that we’d need to invent a YANG signing standard (YOSE?).
> > Seems like YANG should be thought of as RPC / conveyance / transport
> > here, not as a way to format a signed attestation token.
> 
> YANG is an information model (think ASN.1).

YANG people believe YANG is used to define data models.

> It is for humans and for code generators, protocol inspectors, etc, it
> is never bits on the wire.
> It needs to be expressed somehow (XML, JSON, CBOR), which is akin to
> BER/DER.

This is what YANG people call an encoding (or representation) of
instance data (that conforms to a YANG schema). YANG today supports
XML and JSON, CBOR is in the making (but for a long time).

> XML, JSON and CBOR all have signature standards (maybe more than one).
> A specific claim could well have a complex set of information that it
> conveys and that could be expressed in YANG, but I find it difficult to
> imagine such a thing.

/js

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