Skip to main content

Generic YANG Data Model for Connection-Oriented Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Protocols

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:


From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Cc: The IESG <>,,,,,,
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Generic YANG Data Model for Connection Oriented Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-lime-yang-connection-oriented-oam-model-07.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Generic YANG Data Model for Connection Oriented Operations,
   Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols'
  (draft-ietf-lime-yang-connection-oriented-oam-model-07.txt) as Proposed

This document is the product of the Layer Independent OAM Management in the
Multi-Layer Environment Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Warren Kumari and Benoit Claise.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

This document presents a base YANG Data model for connection oriented OAM protocols.  It provides a technology-independent abstraction of  key OAM constructs for such protocols.  The model presented here can  be extended to include technology specific details.  This guarantees  uniformity in the management of OAM protocols and provides support  for nested OAM workflows (i.e., performing OAM functions at different  levels through a unified interface)

Working Group Summary

The WG took some time to reach consensus, but finally did after in-person working sessions.

Document Quality

Are there existing implementations of the protocol? 

Huawei has an implementation based on an  early version of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connection-oriented-oam-model-01, which has been demonstrated in one past IETF meeting.
Huawei  also has a TRILL OAM model implementation which is extension of CO model defined in this document.

Have a significant number of vendors indicated their plan to implement the specification? 

To my knowledge, one, possibly two.

 Are there any reviewers that merit special mention as having done a thorough review, e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a conclusion that the document had no substantive issues? 

 Greg Mirsky did significant reviews and offered many comments.

If there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type or other expert review, what was its course (briefly)? In the case of a Media Type review, on what date was the request posted?

Carl Moberg is doing the Yang Doctor review.


Ron Bonica is the document shepherd. Benoit Claise is the responsible AD

RFC Editor Note