Technical Summary
This document presents two YANG modules, one module to configure a
RESTCONF client and the other module to configure a RESTCONF server.
Both modules support the TLS transport protocol with both standard
RESTCONF and RESTCONF Call Home connections.
Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)
This draft contains placeholder values that need to be replaced with
finalized values at the time of publication. This note summarizes
all of the substitutions that are needed. No other RFC Editor
instructions are specified elsewhere in this document.
Artwork in this document contains shorthand references to drafts in
progress. Please apply the following replacements (note: not all may
be present):
* AAAA --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-crypto-
types
* BBBB --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-trust-
anchors
* CCCC --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-keystore
* DDDD --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-tcp-client-
server
* EEEE --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-ssh-client-
server
* FFFF --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-tls-client-
server
* GGGG --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-http-
client-server
* HHHH --> the assigned RFC value for draft-ietf-netconf-netconf-
client-server
* IIII --> the assigned RFC value for this draft
Artwork in this document contains placeholder values for the date of
publication of this draft. Please apply the following replacement:
* 2024-08-14 --> the publication date of this draft
The "Relation to other RFCs" section Section 1.1 contains the text
"one or more YANG modules" and, later, "modules". This text is
sourced from a file in a context where it is unknown how many modules
a draft defines. The text is not wrong as is, but it may be improved
by stating more directly how many modules are defined.
The "Relation to other RFCs" section Section 1.1 contains a self-
reference to this draft, along with a corresponding reference in the
Appendix. Please replace the self-reference in this section with
"This RFC" (or similar) and remove the self-reference in the
"Normative/Informative References" section, whichever it is in.
Tree-diagrams in this draft may use the '\' line-folding mode defined
in RFC 8792. However, nicer-to-the-eye is when the '\\' line-folding
mode is used. The AD suggested suggested putting a request here for
the RFC Editor to help convert "ugly" '\' folded examples to use the
'\\' folding mode. "Help convert" may be interpreted as, identify
what looks ugly and ask the authors to make the adjustment.
The following Appendix section is to be removed prior to publication:
* Appendix A. Change Log
Working Group Summary
Was there anything in the WG process that is worth noting?
For example, was there controversy about particular points
or were there decisions where the consensus was
particularly rough?
Document Quality
Are there existing implementations of the protocol? Have a
significant number of vendors indicated their plan to
implement the specification? 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? 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?
Personnel
The Document Shepherd for this document is Qiufang Ma. The Responsible
Area Director is Mahesh Jethanandani.
IANA Note
(Insert IANA Note here or remove section)