RFC 8675
A YANG Data Model for Tunnel Interface Types
RFC 8675: A YANG Data Model for Tunnel Interface Types 🎀
Okay bestie, this one's giving "standards-track and iconic" 💅 It's a Standards Track doc, published November 2019, with ISSN 2070-1721. The authors are M. Boucadair (Orange), I. Farrer (Deutsche Telekom AG), and R. Asati (Cisco Systems, Inc.). It doesn't say it obsoletes or updates anything.
Abstract 🦋
Okay so this doc gives us the first version of a YANG module called iana-tunnel-type 💖. It's a collection of IANA-maintained YANG identities used as interface types for tunnel interfaces, and it mirrors IANA's "tunnelType" registry. You can grab the newest revision from the IANA website, ngl.
Tunnel type values aren't added straight into the Tunnel Interface Types YANG module 🙈. They must instead be added to the "tunnelType" IANA registry. Once IANA registers a new tunnel type for a new tunneling scheme (or an existing one that isn't in the registry yet, like LISP or NSH ✨), IANA updates the module to match.
Some IETF-defined tunneling techniques aren't in the current IANA registry, and this doc isn't trying to fill it up with a full 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. Official, serious, and totally real ✨
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) 💜. It represents the consensus of the IETF community, got public review, and was approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). For more on Internet Standards, check Section 2 of RFC 7841.
Info about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to send feedback lives at https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8675 🌸.
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. Please read these carefully, because they spell out your rights and restrictions for 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 they come 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' Addresses1. Introduction ✨
Okay, intro time 🎀. This doc specifies the initial version of the iana-tunnel-type YANG module, which holds a collection of IANA-maintained YANG identities that identify tunnel interface types. The module reflects IANA's tunnelType registry under the SMI Numbers registry [TUNNELTYPE-IANA-REGISTRY]. The latest revision can be grabbed from the IANA website.
Tunnel-specific extensions may be added to the Interface module [RFC8343] depending on the tunnel type, and Appendix A has an example 🧚. It is not the intention of this document to define tunnel-specific extensions for every tunnel encapsulation technology, since those get their own dedicated docs, like [RFC8676]. It's also out of scope 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 [RFC6991] and adopts the Network Management Datastore Architecture (NMDA [RFC8342]) 💅.
The terminology for describing YANG modules is defined in [RFC7950]. The meanings of the symbols used in the tree diagram are defined in [RFC8340] 🌈.
2. IANA Tunnel Type YANG Module 💖
The iana-tunnel-type module imports the iana-if-type module defined in [RFC7224] 🫶.
The initial version of the module includes tunnel types defined in [RFC4087], [RFC7856], [RFC7870], and [RFC6346] ✨.
<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>4.1. YANG Module 💖
okay so IANA registered a URI in the "ns" subregistry within the "IETF XML Registry" [RFC3688] 🎀
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-tunnel-type
Registrant Contact: IANA
XML: N/A; the requested URI is an XML namespace.then IANA registered a YANG module in the "YANG Module Names" subregistry [RFC7950] 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 8675this document defines the initial version of the IANA-maintained iana-tunnel-type YANG module 💅. IANA also 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].so when a tunnel type gets 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 matching enumeration in the IANAifType-MIB (i.e., IANAtunnelType). the "identity" statement should have these 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 🌈
okay this part is giving glow-up energy 💅 IANA 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 | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 3 | gre | GRE encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 4 | minimal | Minimal encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 5 | l2tp | L2TP encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 6 | pptp | PPTP encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 7 | l2f | L2F encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 8 | udp | UDP encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 9 | atmp | ATMP encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 10 | msdp | MSDP encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 11 | sixToFour | 6to4 encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 12 | sixOverFour | 6over4 encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 13 | isatap | ISATAP encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 14 | teredo | Teredo encapsulation | [RFC4087] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 16 | softwireMesh | softwire mesh tunnel | [RFC7856] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
| 17 | dsLite | DS-Lite tunnel | [RFC7870] |
+---------+--------------+------------------------+------------+
Table 1NEW:
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
|Decimal| Name | Description | References |
+=======+=============+===============+=============================+
| 2 | direct |no intermediate| [RFC2003][RFC4213] |
| | | header | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 3 | gre | GRE | [RFC1701][RFC1702][RFC7676] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 4 | minimal | Minimal | [RFC2004] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 5 | l2tp | L2TP | [RFC2661] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 6 | pptp | PPTP | [RFC2637] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 7 | l2f | L2F | [RFC2341] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 8 | udp | UDP | [RFC8085] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 9 | atmp | ATMP | [RFC2107] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 10 | msdp | MSDP | [RFC3618] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 11 | sixToFour | 6to4 | [RFC3056] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 12 | sixOverFour | 6over4 | [RFC2529] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 13 | isatap | ISATAP | [RFC5214] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 14 | teredo | Teredo | [RFC4380] |
| | | encapsulation | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 16 |softwireMesh | softwire mesh | [RFC5565] |
| | | tunnel | |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
| 17 | dsLite |DS-Lite tunnel | [RFC6333] |
+-------+-------------+---------------+-----------------------------+
Table 25. References 📚
5.1. Normative References
these are the docs this spec leans on the most, so bookmark them bestie 🔖
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3688>.
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6242>.
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6991>.
[RFC7224] Bjorklund, M., "IANA Interface Type YANG Module",
RFC 7224, DOI 10.17487/RFC7224, May 2014,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7224>.
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7950>.
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8040>.
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8341>.
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8342>.
[RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.
[TUNNELTYPE-IANA-REGISTRY]
IANA, "Structure of Management Information (SMI) Numbers
(MIB Module Registrations)",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers>.5.2. Informative References 📚
Okay, now the bonus reading list, bestie. These are the informative references, so nothing here changes what the spec says, but they're the background stuff the author pointed to. 🧚
[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>.
[RFC1701] Hanks, S., Li, T., Farinacci, D., and P. Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 1701, DOI 10.17487/RFC1701, October 1994, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1701>.
[RFC1702] Hanks, S., Li, T., Farinacci, D., and P. Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 networks", RFC 1702, DOI 10.17487/RFC1702, October 1994, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1702>.
[RFC2003] Perkins, C., "IP Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2003, DOI 10.17487/RFC2003, October 1996, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2003>.
[RFC2004] Perkins, C., "Minimal Encapsulation within IP", RFC 2004, DOI 10.17487/RFC2004, October 1996, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2004>.
[RFC2107] Hamzeh, K., "Ascend Tunnel Management Protocol - ATMP", RFC 2107, DOI 10.17487/RFC2107, February 1997, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2107>.
[RFC2341] Valencia, A., Littlewood, M., and T. Kolar, "Cisco Layer Two Forwarding (Protocol) "L2F"", RFC 2341, DOI 10.17487/RFC2341, May 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2341>.
[RFC2529] Carpenter, B. and C. Jung, "Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without Explicit Tunnels", RFC 2529, DOI 10.17487/RFC2529, March 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2529>.
[RFC2637] Hamzeh, K., Pall, G., Verthein, W., Taarud, J., Little, W., and G. Zorn, "Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP)", RFC 2637, DOI 10.17487/RFC2637, July 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2637>.
[RFC2661] Townsley, W., Valencia, A., Rubens, A., Pall, G., Zorn, G., and B. Palter, "Layer Two Tunneling Protocol "L2TP"", RFC 2661, DOI 10.17487/RFC2661, August 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2661>.
[RFC3056] Carpenter, B. and K. Moore, "Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds", RFC 3056, DOI 10.17487/RFC3056, February 2001, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3056>.
[RFC3618] Fenner, B., Ed. and D. Meyer, Ed., "Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618, DOI 10.17487/RFC3618, October 2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3618>.
[RFC4087] Thaler, D., "IP Tunnel MIB", RFC 4087, DOI 10.17487/RFC4087, June 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4087>.
[RFC4213] Nordmark, E. and R. Gilligan, "Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers", RFC 4213, DOI 10.17487/RFC4213, October 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4213>.
[RFC4380] Huitema, C., "Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through Network Address Translations (NATs)", RFC 4380, DOI 10.17487/RFC4380, February 2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4380>.
[RFC5214] Templin, F., Gleeson, T., and D. Thaler, "Intra-Site Automatic Tunnel Addressing Protocol (ISATAP)", RFC 5214, DOI 10.17487/RFC5214, March 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5214>.
[RFC5565] Wu, J., Cui, Y., Metz, C., and E. Rosen, "Softwire Mesh Framework", RFC 5565, DOI 10.17487/RFC5565, June 2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5565>.
[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4 Exhaustion", RFC 6333, DOI 10.17487/RFC6333, August 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6333>.
[RFC6346] Bush, R., Ed., "The Address plus Port (A+P) Approach to the IPv4 Address Shortage", RFC 6346, DOI 10.17487/RFC6346, August 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6346>.
[RFC7676] Pignataro, C., Bonica, R., and S. Krishnan, "IPv6 Support for Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 7676, DOI 10.17487/RFC7676, October 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7676>.
[RFC7856] Cui, Y., Dong, J., Wu, P., Xu, M., and A. Yla-Jaaski, "Softwire Mesh Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 7856, DOI 10.17487/RFC7856, May 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7856>.
[RFC7870] 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/RFC7870, June 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7870>.
[RFC8085] Eggert, L., Fairhurst, G., and G. Shepherd, "UDP Usage Guidelines", BCP 145, RFC 8085, DOI 10.17487/RFC8085, March 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8085>.
[RFC8340] Bjorklund, M. and L. Berger, Ed., "YANG Tree Diagrams", BCP 215, RFC 8340, DOI 10.17487/RFC8340, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8340>.
[RFC8343] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, March 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8343>.
[RFC8676] Farrer, I., Ed. and M. Boucadair, Ed., "YANG Modules for IPv4-in-IPv6 Address plus Port (A+P) Softwires", RFC 8676, DOI 10.17487/RFC8676, November 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8676>.
Appendix A. Example Usage 🎀
Here's a super cute example of how the Interface YANG module can get augmented with tunnel-specific parameters. 💅 In this one, the module gets a 'remote-endpoint' added for the tunnel. The tree looks like this:
module: example-iftunnel-extension
augment /if:interfaces/if:interface:
+--rw remote-endpoint? inet:ipv6-addressThe 'example-iftunnel-extension' module imports the modules defined in [RFC6991] and [RFC8343], plus 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 🫶
Huge 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.comThat's the whole spec, bestie! 🌈👑 You made it through the entire thing, and honestly you're iconic. 🦋
📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc8675 2019-11
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms