(draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang-00) IETF 97 – Seoul Nov 2016 YANG Data Model for LDP and mLDP (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang-00) Kamran Raza (Cisco) Xufeng Liu (Kuatro Technologies) Santosh Esale (Juniper) Xia Chen (Huawei) Himanshu Shah (Ciena) Rajiv Asati (Cisco) Sowmya Krishnaswamy (Cisco) Loa Andresson (Huawei) Jeff Tantsura Matthew Bocci (Nokia) … and several other contributors as acknowledged in the draft

Revision History WG doc – Rev 00 Rev -00 Posted before, and presented at, IETF 92 in Dallas. Covered base LDP configuration, rpc, and notification Rev -01 posted before, and presented at, IETF 93 in Prague. Covered base mLDP configuration, rpc, and notification Rev -02: posted before, and presented at, IETF 94 in Yokohama Alignment with mpls-base and open-config (work in progress) Rev -03: posted before, and presented at, IETF 95 in Buenos Aires Addressed comments from WG - MPLS WG chair (Ross) and others, general cleanup Rev -04: posted before, and presented at, IETF 96 in Berlin Addressed comments from MPLS – RT WG doc – Rev 00 Posted right after IETF 96

WG Adoption After addressing most of MPLS-RT comments in rev -04, WG adoption requested during IETF 96 WG adoption poll was initiated by document shepherd during IETF 96 Document published as WG document (draft-ietf-mpls- ldp-mldp-yang) post IETF (in mid August 2016)

Model / Doc Split Joint document (draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang) covering both LDP and mLDP: Total 114 pages – Too big !!! One of the MPLS-RT comment was to consider model / document split between LDP and mLDP. Team worked on the split and just posted the two documents (replacing joint draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang) LDP: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-yang mLDP: draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-yang The split documents also have some cleanup and address couple more MPLS-RT comments: label-policy config etc.

MPLS RT: Pending Comments Lot of features and objects The team reviewed and have cut down on some features and/or made them vendor private Partition into “base” and “extended” parts Team almost done with categorization of LDP and mLDP features/items in “base” vs “extended” Next revisions to be posted shortly with both the above comments addressed

Pending/Open items Revisit and cut-down on the scope of the document Split the model into a base and extended items (Re-)align with regards to OPSTATE decision Specify default values for RFC-defined configuration parameters Add statistics for mLDP root LSPs and bindings

Next Steps Post new revisions for LDP and mLDP: Partition into “base” and “extended” model Realign with respect to OP-STATE Address some of OPEN items