https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/materials/agenda-124-netmod
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/session/netmod
WG Chairs:
Lou Berger (lberger at labs dot net)
Kent Watsen (kent plus ietf at watsen dot net)
WG Secretary:
James Cumming (james.cumming at nokia dot com)
Time: Friday, November 7, 2025 - Friday Session I 09:30 - 11:00 (14:30 -
16:00 UTC)
Room: Van Horne |
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/floor-plan?room=van-horne
Available During and After Session:
Notes: https://notes.ietf.org/notes-ietf-124-netmod?both
Slides: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/session/netmod
Video/Meetecho:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/ietf124/?session=34805
Audio stream: https://mp3.conf.meetecho.com/ietf124/34805.m3u
Onsite tool:
https://meetings.conf.meetecho.com/onsite124/?session=34805
Drafts (TGZ):
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/agenda/netmod-drafts.tgz
Drafts (PDF):
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/agenda/netmod-drafts.pdf
Datatracker: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/netmod/about
ICS: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/124/session/34805.ics
Available After Session:
Recording: http://www.meetecho.com/ietf124/recordings#NETMOD
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7VBhlWJwKg
Jabber Logs: https://www.ietf.org/jabber/logs/netmod
Duration: 10 mins
Discussion Leaders: WG Chairs
(00:00:00) Introductions...
(00:06:00) Mahesh Jethanandani: For my queue. The semver draft has more
than 5 authors on the draft and I need the shepherd to update the
writeup in order to provide a justification for the extended set of
authors. I also need a modification to the YANG module filename portion
of the semver draft to ensure that the MAY publish a filename with the
semver is changed to a MUST. There are some other reviews that I am
waiting on and the history tab will explain why each document is in it's
current state.
(00:09:57) Charles Eckel: We had a new liaison this weekend. We had let
the 3GPP know that we are working on system config and immutable. The
liaison asks whether the WG will reconsider the solutions in these
drafts as they do not work for 3GPP. They are looking for a response to
their liaision.
Kent Watsen: The WG discussed this liaison before and responded to the
liaison with the decision that the 3GPP desired behaviour isn't what the
WG wanted to carry forward.
Lou Berger: We are contribution driven. If the members of the 3GPP wish
the solution to go in a different direction we would like them to attend
the IETF (and the WG) and provide contributions. Will you Charles be
willing to help craft some text to this affect?
Charles Eckel: Yes
(00:13:19) Qin Wu: For the immutable draft, we are looking to update
this after the meeting.
Druation: 20 min
Discussion Leader: Michal Vasko
Drafts:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-schema-comparison/
(00:15:47) Presentation start
(00:27:37) Reshad Rahman: Is the plan to have the tool work for YANG
packages as well?
Rob Wilton: Yes, this should work for YANG packages. Each module can use
this tool and then aggreagate this up to the package. If this is being
done at the schema level we could aggregate up into the YANG library.
Michal Vasko: I need to look further into this. The information is there
but it needs work.
Joe Clarke: Thank you for doing this, and for libyang. You mentioned
conformance is backwards compatilble (BC) and Non-backwards compatible
(NBC). In general people want a tool that tells them what their next
semantic version is. I have been doing this in pyang but it feels this
might be better.
Michal Vasko: This sounds interesting. We could look into it.
Joe Clarke: If the previous version is 1.0.0 it might tell you the next
one is 1.1.0. Given that the previous version is x it tells you the next
is y. I was hoping that this tool could do that and suggest the new
version of the module.
Qin Wu: This is useful. Is this specific for yang 1.1 or will it work
with YANG 1.0? (And perhaps YANG-next).
Michal Vasko: Yes, we will support both 1.0 and 1.1.
Qin Wu: Could you clarify this in the draft's introduction along with
NMDA diff?
Michal Vasko: NMDA diff is comparing YANG instance data and here we are
comparing YANG schema so it may not be applicable.
Kent Watsen: Good to hear it works for 1.0 and 1.1 modules. What happens
if the only change is the module's yang-version?
Michal Vasko: There are no rules for this currently. Currently it would
be NBC (because there is no rule for this and the default rule is NBC).
Kent Watsen: A 1.1 module can import both 1.0 and 1.1 modules but 1.0
modules cannot import 1.1 modules. By changing the version you change
this.
Michal Vasko: That sounds like a good argument for making it NBC.
Lou Berger: This is really interesting on tooling but you didn't talk
about the extensions in the draft. In particular, the extension that you
mark things as BC is useful but you didn't discuss this in the
presentation. Could you elaborate please?
Michal Vasko: Changes are always NBC unless this extension is used to
mark elements as BC.
Lou Berger: We should take this back to IANA so we can use this to flag
items.
Duration: 10 mins
Discussion Leader: Rob Wilton
Drafts:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-yang-packages/
(00:38:02) Presentation start
(00:39:18) Kent Watsen (Chair): As soon as the IANA draft is created we
will automatically adopt it.
Mahesh Jethanandani: I had a meeting with the RFC editors. They would
like to know what to do with the YANG modules that are already in the
RFC editor queue. What do they do with the revision statements inside
the document.
Rob Wilton: It depends when this document gets to a stable state. I
think this will be an AD decision.
(00:46:00) Lou Berger: There is a plea for additional participation.
Please contribute to the documents as there are a number of docs
outstanding.
Rob Wilton: I will post the regular call details to the list to remind
the WG in case you wish to attend.
Duration: 10 min
Discussion Leader: Joe Clarke
URL:
(00:47:00) Presentation start
Joe Clarke: AD decision that the versioning, semver and module filename
drafts will be held until there is tooling available.
(00:59:39) Italo Busi: Thanks for improving the tooling. rfcstrip
requires the date to be updated. This is a common mistake, can the
tooling help here? If we can avoid duplicate information that would be
great.
Reshad Rahman: xym does this I believe. I think you have covered all
the tools for the IETF but is this covered in all tools used by YANG
Catalog?
Beniot Claise: We used xym, confd, Yuma Pro and yanglint.
Joe Clarke: I didn't touch yanger.
Thomas Graf: Great work. Thanks to the AD for holding these docs. I
don't see anything on semantic versioning.
Joe Clarke: This was a test. All IETF modules must have a semantic
version so we now check for this when you use --ietf in pyang.
Mehesh Jethanandani: The reason for socialising this is to get authors
of drafts ready. I was thinking of cutting over when the IESG approves
these documents for publication but I'm willing to hear feedback on
this.
(01:05:10) Kent Watsen (Chair): Would it make sense to consider a
"semver considerations" section to document (to be removed by the RFC
editor), starting immediately to ensure semver tools work? Would that be
helpful to ensuring this work is complete and accurate.
Joe Clarke: This may help but not all the checks/options are implemented
yet. The majority of the changes here are linting only. pyang is the
exception here and this is probably the initial tool to use.
Lou Berger: There is room for process modification here. Perhaps we
should add something to the IANA considerations for backwards
compatibility. We should add this into the idnits tool that should warn
for BC vs. NBC changes.
Joe Clarke: Good idea.
Benoit Claise: In the data tracker we check pyang and yanglint. We
need to check some things in yang catalogue.
(01:09:05) Qin Wu: Perhaps you should hold some sort of tooling
tutorial?
Joe Clarke: Great suggestion. I can come up with some markdown docs for
that and publish them alongside some of these tools.
Per Andersson: We actually use the Debian stable track in the
datatracker (rather than the Ubuntu one). We should push these changes
into the upstream debian. I will reach out to the tools team.
Thomas Graf: RFC8407bis does not mention this. The authors should
consider this.
Mahesh Jethanandani (from Zulip chat): Can we use the new "IANA
Document" to update rfc8407bis?
James Cumming: We should add these checks to the YANG doctors guideance
too.
Beniot Claise: We should raise a liasion to the other SDOs to advertise
this.
Lou Berger: Perhaps we should wait for some more stability but we are
contribution driven.
Duration: 10 min
Discussion Leader: Ahmed Elhassany
Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-netana-nmop-yang-anydata-validation/01/
(01:13:21) Presentation start
(01:20:20) Rob Wilton: Validating anydata is useful so we need a
solution here. The data might not be put into the root of the schema
tree so the tools need to be able to tell the path to the subtree. We
shouldn't assume anydata isn't always from the root. RFC8342 should be
considered with validating operational datastores.
James Cumming: You mentioned it was optional but I didn't see in the
draft how this would be opted in/out? Is there a broader scope here as
well for optional anydata validation?
POLL: Should the WG adopt the anydata-validation draft?
Kent Watsen (Chair): Poll indicates good support for adoption
Duration: 10 min
Discussion Leader: Camilo Cardona
Draft:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-cardona-claise-onion-yang-coverage
(01:23:07) Presentation start
Rob Wilton: This is a good thing to solve in an automated way. I am not
sure whether this is put into the documents though and within the
documents keep a small snippet and a reference to the test data.
Qin Wu: This is very useful. Thanks.
Duration: 10 min
Discussion Leader: TBD
Out of time, will discuss when have draft
(01:31:10) Meeting concludes