Re: configuration: writable MIB modules versus NETCONF/YANG modules

On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Andy Bierman wrote:

> For instance, today an author can request protocol number allocations from
>> IANA etc. Wouldn't it make sense to have a similar model for extensions of
>> yang models?
>
> Anybody can define their own YANG modules. IANA is not needed
> to publish non-IETF modules.

You completely missed my point. My point was to have yang modules defined 
in the same RFC as the proposed standard was defined in, and that a 
request would go out to some entity to approve the proposed yang model for 
whatever was being standardized. There would be a repository of IETF yang 
models somewhere, and these would no longer be published in RFC form, but 
by some other process. The IANA reference was just an example of existing 
such process/registry.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [email protected]