|
|
|
|
|
|
IETF RFC 8675
Last modified on Sunday, November 17th, 2019
 Permanent link to RFC 8675
 Search GitHub Wiki for RFC 8675
 Show other RFCs mentioning RFC 8675
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. Boucadair
Request for Comments: 8675 Orange
Category: Standards Track I. Farrer
ISSN: 2070-1721 Deutsche Telekom AG
R. Asati
Cisco Systems, Inc.
November 2019
A YANG Data Model for Tunnel Interface Types
 Abstract
This document specifies the initial version of a YANG module "iana-
tunnel-type", which contains a collection of IANA-maintained YANG
identities used as interface types for tunnel interfaces. The module
reflects the "tunnelType" registry maintained by IANA. The latest
revision of this YANG module can be obtained from the IANA website.
Tunnel type values are not directly added to the Tunnel Interface
Types YANG module; they must instead be added to the "tunnelType"
IANA registry. Once a new tunnel type registration is made by IANA
for a new tunneling scheme or even an existing one that is not
already listed in the current registry (e.g., LISP, NSH), IANA will
update the Tunnel Interface Types YANG module accordingly.
Some of the IETF-defined tunneling techniques are not listed in the
current IANA registry. It is not the intent of this document to
update the existing IANA registry with a comprehensive list of tunnel
technologies. Registrants must follow the IETF registration
procedure for interface types whenever a new tunnel type is needed.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8675.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. IANA Tunnel Type YANG Module
3. Security Considerations
4. IANA Considerations
4.1. YANG Module
4.2. Updates to the IANA tunnelType Table
5. References
5.1. Normative References
5.2. Informative References
Appendix A. Example Usage
Acknowledgements
Authors' Addresses
1. Introduction
This document specifies the initial version of the iana-tunnel-type
YANG module containing a collection of IANA-maintained YANG
identities identifying tunnel interface types. The module reflects
IANA's tunnelType registry under the SMI Numbers registry
[TUNNELTYPE-IANA-REGISTRY]. The latest revision of this module can
be obtained from the IANA website.
Tunnel-specific extensions may be added to the Interface module
[RFC 8343] as a function of the tunnel type. An example of this is
provided in Appendix A. It is not the intention of this document to
define tunnel-specific extensions for every tunnel encapsulation
technology; those are discussed in dedicated documents such as
[RFC 8676]. Likewise, it is out of the scope of this document to
update the existing IANA tunnelType registry
[TUNNELTYPE-IANA-REGISTRY] with a comprehensive list of tunnel
technologies. Guidelines and registration procedures for interface
types and sub-types are discussed in [IFTYPE-REG].
This document uses the common YANG types defined in [RFC 6991] and
adopts the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA
[RFC 8342]).
The terminology for describing YANG modules is defined in [RFC 7950].
The meanings of the symbols used in the tree diagram are defined in
[RFC 8340].
2. IANA Tunnel Type YANG Module
The iana-tunnel-type module imports the 'iana-if-type' module defined
in [RFC 7224].
The initial version of the module includes tunnel types defined in
[RFC 4087], [RFC 7856], [RFC 7870], and [RFC 6346].
<CODE BEGINS> file "iana-tunnel-type@2019-11-16.yang"
module iana-tunnel-type {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-tunnel-type";
prefix iana-tunnel-type;
import iana-if-type {
prefix ift;
reference
"RFC 7224: IANA Interface Type YANG Module";
}
organization
"IANA";
contact
"Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
Postal: ICANN
12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90094-2536
United States of America
Tel: +1 310 301 5800
<mailto:iana@iana.org>";
description
"This module contains a collection of YANG identities defined
by IANA and used as interface types for tunnel interfaces.
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8675; see
the RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2019-11-16 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC 8675: A YANG Data Model for Tunnel Interface Types";
}
identity other {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"None of the following values.";
reference
"RFC 4087: IP Tunnel MIB";
}
identity direct {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"No intermediate header.";
reference
"RFC 2003: IP Encapsulation within IP
RFC 4213: Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts
and Routers";
}
identity gre {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"GRE encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 1701: Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)
RFC 1702: Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 networks
RFC 7676: IPv6 Support for Generic Routing Encapsulation
(GRE)";
}
identity minimal {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"Minimal encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 2004: Minimal Encapsulation within IP";
}
identity l2tp {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"L2TP encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 2661: Layer Two Tunneling Protocol 'L2TP'";
}
identity pptp {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"PPTP encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 2637: Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP)";
}
identity l2f {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"L2F encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 2341: Cisco Layer Two Forwarding (Protocol) 'L2F'";
}
identity udp {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"UDP encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 1234: Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Networks,
RFC 8085: UDP Usage Guidelines, Section 3.1.11";
}
identity atmp {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"ATMP encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 2107: Ascend Tunnel Management Protocol - ATMP";
}
identity msdp {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"MSDP encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 3618: Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP)";
}
identity sixtofour {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"6to4 encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 3056: Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds";
}
identity sixoverfour {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"6over4 encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 2529: Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without
Explicit Tunnels";
}
identity isatap {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"ISATAP encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 5214: Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol
(ISATAP)";
}
identity teredo {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"Teredo encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 4380: Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through
Network Address Translations (NATs)";
}
identity iphttps {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"IP over HTTPS (IP-HTTPS) Tunneling Protocol.";
reference
"Microsoft Corporation, IP over HTTPS (IP-HTTPS) Tunneling
Protocol Specification,
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd358571.aspx";
}
identity softwiremesh {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"softwire mesh tunnel.";
reference
"RFC 5565: Softwire Mesh Framework";
}
identity dslite {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"DS-Lite tunnel.";
reference
"RFC 6333: Dual-Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following
IPv4 Exhaustion";
}
identity aplusp {
base ift:tunnel;
description
"A+P encapsulation.";
reference
"RFC 6346: The Address plus Port (A+P) Approach to the IPv4
Address Shortage";
}
}
<CODE ENDS>
3. Security Considerations
The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data
that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such
as NETCONF [RFC 6241] or RESTCONF [RFC 8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer
is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure
transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC 6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer
is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS
[RFC 8446].
The Network Configuration Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC 8341]
provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or
RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or
RESTCONF protocol operations and content.
The module defined in this document defines YANG identities for the
iana-tunnel-types registry. These identities are intended to be
referenced by other YANG modules, and by themselves do not expose any
nodes which are writable, contain read-only state, or RPCs. As such,
there are no additional security issues to be considered relating to
the module defined in this document.
4. IANA Considerations
4.1. YANG Module
IANA has registered the following URI in the "ns" subregistry within
the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC 3688]:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-tunnel-type
Registrant Contact: IANA
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.
IANA registered the following YANG module in the "YANG Module Names"
subregistry [RFC 7950] within the "YANG Parameters" registry.
Name: iana-tunnel-type
Namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-tunnel-type
Prefix: iana-tunnel-type
Reference: RFC 8675
This document defines the initial version of the IANA-maintained
iana-tunnel-type YANG module. IANA has added this note to the
registry:
Tunnel type values must not be directly added to the iana-tunnel-
type YANG module. They must instead be added to the "tunnelType"
subregistry (under the "ifType definitions" registry) at [IANA
registry smi-numbers].
When a tunnel type is added to the "tunnelType" subregistry, a new
"identity" statement must be added to the iana-tunnel-type YANG
module. The name of the "identity" is the lower-case of the
corresponding enumeration in the IANAifType-MIB (i.e.,
IANAtunnelType). The "identity" statement should have the following
sub-statements defined:
"base": Contains 'ift:tunnel'.
"description": Replicates the description from the registry.
"reference": Replicates the reference from the registry and adds
the title of the document.
Unassigned or reserved values are not present in the module.
When the iana-tunnel-type YANG module is updated, a new "revision"
statement must be added in front of the existing revision statements.
IANA has added the following note to "tunnelType" subregistry:
When this registry is modified, the YANG module iana-tunnel-type
must be updated as defined in RFC 8675.
4.2. Updates to the IANA tunnelType Table
IANA has updated the following entries in the tunnelType registry
under the SMI Numbers registry [TUNNELTYPE-IANA-REGISTRY].
OLD:
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| Decimal | Name | Description | References |
+=========+==============+========================+============+
| 2 | direct | no intermediate header | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 3 | gre | GRE encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 4 | minimal | Minimal encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 5 | l2tp | L2TP encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 6 | pptp | PPTP encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 7 | l2f | L2F encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 8 | udp | UDP encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 9 | atmp | ATMP encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 10 | msdp | MSDP encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 11 | sixToFour | 6to4 encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 12 | sixOverFour | 6over4 encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 13 | isatap | ISATAP encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 14 | teredo | Teredo encapsulation | [RFC 4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 16 | softwireMesh | softwire mesh tunnel | [RFC 7856] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 17 | dsLite | DS-Lite tunnel | [RFC 7870] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
Table 1
NEW:
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
|Decimal| Name | Description | References |
+=======+=============+===============+=============================+
| 2 | direct |no intermediate| [RFC 2003][RFC 4213] |
| | | header | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 3 | gre | GRE | [RFC 1701][RFC 1702][RFC 7676] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 4 | minimal | Minimal | [RFC 2004] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 5 | l2tp | L2TP | [RFC 2661] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 6 | pptp | PPTP | [RFC 2637] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 7 | l2f | L2F | [RFC 2341] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 8 | udp | UDP | [RFC 8085] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 9 | atmp | ATMP | [RFC 2107] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 10 | msdp | MSDP | [RFC 3618] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 11 | sixToFour | 6to4 | [RFC 3056] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 12 | sixOverFour | 6over4 | [RFC 2529] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 13 | isatap | ISATAP | [RFC 5214] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 14 | teredo | Teredo | [RFC 4380] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 16 |softwireMesh | softwire mesh | [RFC 5565] |
| | | tunnel | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 17 | dsLite |DS-Lite tunnel | [RFC 6333] |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
Table 2
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[RFC 3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 3688>.
[RFC 6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC 6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 6241>.
[RFC 6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC 6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 6242>.
[RFC 6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC 6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 6991>.
[RFC 7224] Bjorklund, M., "IANA Interface Type YANG Module",
RFC 7224, DOI 10.17487/RFC 7224, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 7224>.
[RFC 7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC 7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 7950>.
[RFC 8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC 8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8040>.
[RFC 8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8341>.
[RFC 8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC 8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8342>.
[RFC 8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC 8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8446>.
[TUNNELTYPE-IANA-REGISTRY]
IANA, "Structure of Management Information (SMI) Numbers
(MIB Module Registrations)",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers>.
5.2. Informative References
[IFTYPE-REG]
Thaler, D. and D. Romascanu, "Guidelines and Registration
Procedures for Interface Types and Tunnel Types", Work in
Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-thaler-iftype-reg-06, 2
November 2019,
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-thaler-iftype-reg-06>.
[RFC 1701] Hanks, S., Li, T., Farinacci, D., and P. Traina, "Generic
Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 1701,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 1701, October 1994,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 1701>.
[RFC 1702] Hanks, S., Li, T., Farinacci, D., and P. Traina, "Generic
Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 networks", RFC 1702,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 1702, October 1994,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 1702>.
[RFC 2003] Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 2003, October 1996,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2003>.
[RFC 2004] Perkins, C., "Minimal Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2004,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 2004, October 1996,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2004>.
[RFC 2107] Hamzeh, K., "Ascend Tunnel Management Protocol - ATMP",
RFC 2107, DOI 10.17487/RFC 2107, February 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2107>.
[RFC 2341] Valencia, A., Littlewood, M., and T. Kolar, "Cisco Layer
Two Forwarding (Protocol) "L2F"", RFC 2341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 2341, May 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2341>.
[RFC 2529] Carpenter, B. and C. Jung, "Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4
Domains without Explicit Tunnels", RFC 2529,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 2529, March 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2529>.
[RFC 2637] Hamzeh, K., Pall, G., Verthein, W., Taarud, J., Little,
W., and G. Zorn, "Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol
(PPTP)", RFC 2637, DOI 10.17487/RFC 2637, July 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2637>.
[RFC 2661] Townsley, W., Valencia, A., Rubens, A., Pall, G., Zorn,
G., and B. Palter, "Layer Two Tunneling Protocol "L2TP"",
RFC 2661, DOI 10.17487/RFC 2661, August 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 2661>.
[RFC 3056] Carpenter, B. and K. Moore, "Connection of IPv6 Domains
via IPv4 Clouds", RFC 3056, DOI 10.17487/RFC 3056, February
2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 3056>.
[RFC 3618] Fenner, B., Ed. and D. Meyer, Ed., "Multicast Source
Discovery Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 3618, October 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 3618>.
[RFC 4087] Thaler, D., "IP Tunnel MIB", RFC 4087,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 4087, June 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 4087>.
[RFC 4213] Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition Mechanisms
for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 4213, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 4213>.
[RFC 4380] Huitema, C., "Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through
Network Address Translations (NATs)", RFC 4380,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 4380, February 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 4380>.
[RFC 5214] Templin, F., Gleeson, T., and D. Thaler, "Intra-Site
Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP)", RFC 5214,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 5214, March 2008,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 5214>.
[RFC 5565] Wu, J., Cui, Y., Metz, C., and E. Rosen, "Softwire Mesh
Framework", RFC 5565, DOI 10.17487/RFC 5565, June 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 5565>.
[RFC 6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
Exhaustion", RFC 6333, DOI 10.17487/RFC 6333, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 6333>.
[RFC 6346] Bush, R., Ed., "The Address plus Port (A+P) Approach to
the IPv4 Address Shortage", RFC 6346,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 6346, August 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 6346>.
[RFC 7676] Pignataro, C., Bonica, R., and S. Krishnan, "IPv6 Support
for Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 7676,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 7676, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 7676>.
[RFC 7856] Cui, Y., Dong, J., Wu, P., Xu, M., and A. Yla-Jaaski,
"Softwire Mesh Management Information Base (MIB)",
RFC 7856, DOI 10.17487/RFC 7856, May 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 7856>.
[RFC 7870] Fu, Y., Jiang, S., Dong, J., and Y. Chen, "Dual-Stack Lite
(DS-Lite) Management Information Base (MIB) for Address
Family Transition Routers (AFTRs)", RFC 7870,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 7870, June 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 7870>.
[RFC 8085] Eggert, L., Fairhurst, G., and G. Shepherd, "UDP Usage
Guidelines", BCP 145, RFC 8085, DOI 10.17487/RFC 8085,
March 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8085>.
[RFC 8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams",
BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC 8340, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8340>.
[RFC 8343] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface
Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC 8343, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8343>.
[RFC 8676] Farrer, I., Ed. and M. Boucadair, Ed., "YANG Modules for
IPv4-in-IPv6 Address plus Port (A+P) Softwires", RFC 8676,
DOI 10.17487/RFC 8676, November 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 8676>.
Appendix A. Example Usage
The following example illustrates how the Interface YANG module can
be augmented with tunnel-specific parameters. In this example, the
module is augmented with a 'remote-endpoint' for the tunnel. A tree
structure is provided below:
module: example-iftunnel-extension
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface:
+--rw remote-endpoint? inet:ipv6-address
The 'example-iftunnel-extension' module imports the modules defined
in [RFC 6991] and [RFC 8343] in addition to the "iana-tunnel-type"
module defined in this document.
module example-iftunnel-extension {
yang-version 1.1;
namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:example-iftunnel-extension";
prefix example;
import ietf-inet-types {
prefix inet;
reference
"RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types, Section 4";
}
import ietf-interfaces {
prefix if;
reference
"RFC 8343: A YANG Data Model for Interface Management";
}
import iana-tunnel-type {
prefix iana-tunnel-type;
reference
"RFC 8675: A Tunnel Extension to the Interface Management
YANG Module";
}
organization "IETF Softwire Working Group";
contact
"WG Web: <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/softwire/>
WG List: <mailto:softwire@ietf.org>
Author: Mohamed Boucadair
<mailto:mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>";
description
"This is an example YANG module to extend the Interface YANG
module with tunnel-specific parameters.
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as
authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License
set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
This version of this YANG module is part of RFC 8675; see
the RFC itself for full legal notices.";
revision 2019-10-21 {
description
"Initial revision.";
reference
"RFC 8675: Tunnel Interface Types YANG Module";
}
augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface" {
when "derived-from(if:type, 'iana-tunnel-type:gre')";
description
"Augments Interface module with specific tunnel parameters.";
leaf remote-endpoint {
type inet:ipv6-address;
description
"IPv6 address of the remote GRE endpoint.";
}
}
}
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to Tom Petch and Martin Bjorklund for the detailed
review and suggestions.
Thanks to Andy Bierman for the Yangdoctors review.
Thanks to Dale Worley, David Black, and Yaron Sheffer for the review.
Authors' Addresses
Mohamed Boucadair
Orange
35000 Rennes
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Ian Farrer
Deutsche Telekom AG
CTO-ATI, Landgrabenweg 151
53227 Bonn
Germany
Email: ian.farrer@telekom.de
Rajiv Asati
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7025 Kit Creek Rd.
RTP, NC 27709
United States of America
Email: Rajiva@cisco.com
RFC TOTAL SIZE: 31269 bytes
PUBLICATION DATE: Sunday, November 17th, 2019
LEGAL RIGHTS: The IETF Trust (see BCP 78)
|
