draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-06.txt		draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-07.txt
	NETMOD Working Group L. Lhotka		NETMOD Working Group L. Lhotka
	Internet-Draft CZ.NIC		Internet-Draft CZ.NIC
	Intended status: Standards Track October 07, 2015		Intended status: Standards Track January 28, 2016
	Expires: April 9, 2016		Expires: July 31, 2016
	JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG		JSON Encoding of Data Modeled with YANG
	draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-06		draft-ietf-netmod-yang-json-07
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines encoding rules for representing configuration,		This document defines encoding rules for representing configuration,
	state data, RPC operation or action input and output parameters, and		state data, RPC operation or action input and output parameters, and
	notifications defined using YANG as JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)		notifications defined using YANG as JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)
	text.		text.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	skipping to change at page 1, line 33		skipping to change at page 1, line 33
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on April 9, 2016.		This Internet-Draft will expire on July 31, 2016.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as		the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
	skipping to change at page 2, line 18		skipping to change at page 2, line 18
	2. Terminology and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Terminology and Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Properties of the JSON Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		3. Properties of the JSON Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	4. Names and Namespaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		4. Names and Namespaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5. Encoding of YANG Data Node Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		5. Encoding of YANG Data Node Instances . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	5.1. The "leaf" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5.1. The "leaf" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5.2. The "container" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5.2. The "container" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5.3. The "leaf-list" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5.3. The "leaf-list" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	5.4. The "list" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		5.4. The "list" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	5.5. The "anydata" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		5.5. The "anydata" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	5.6. The "anyxml" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		5.6. The "anyxml" Data Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
			5.7. Metadata Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	6. Representing YANG Data Types in JSON Values . . . . . . . . . 10		6. Representing YANG Data Types in JSON Values . . . . . . . . . 10
	6.1. Numeric Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		6.1. Numeric Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	6.2. The "string" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		6.2. The "string" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	6.3. The "boolean" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		6.3. The "boolean" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	6.4. The "enumeration" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		6.4. The "enumeration" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	6.5. The "bits" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		6.5. The "bits" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	6.6. The "binary" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		6.6. The "binary" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	6.7. The "leafref" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		6.7. The "leafref" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	6.8. The "identityref" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		6.8. The "identityref" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	6.9. The "empty" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		6.9. The "empty" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	skipping to change at page 2, line 39		skipping to change at page 2, line 40
	6.11. The "instance-identifier" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		6.11. The "instance-identifier" Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	7. I-JSON Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		7. I-JSON Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	Appendix A. A Complete Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16		Appendix A. A Complete Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
	Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18		Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
	B.1. Changes Between Revisions -05 and -06 . . . . . . . . . . 18		B.1. Changes Between Revisions -05 and -06 . . . . . . . . . . 18
	B.2. Changes Between Revisions -04 and -05 . . . . . . . . . . 18		B.2. Changes Between Revisions -05 and -06 . . . . . . . . . . 19
	B.3. Changes Between Revisions -03 and -04 . . . . . . . . . . 19		B.3. Changes Between Revisions -04 and -05 . . . . . . . . . . 19
	B.4. Changes Between Revisions -02 and -03 . . . . . . . . . . 19		B.4. Changes Between Revisions -03 and -04 . . . . . . . . . . 19
	B.5. Changes Between Revisions -01 and -02 . . . . . . . . . . 19		B.5. Changes Between Revisions -02 and -03 . . . . . . . . . . 19
	B.6. Changes Between Revisions -00 and -01 . . . . . . . . . . 19		B.6. Changes Between Revisions -01 and -02 . . . . . . . . . . 19
			B.7. Changes Between Revisions -00 and -01 . . . . . . . . . . 19
	Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The NETCONF protocol [RFC6241] uses XML [W3C.REC-xml-20081126] for		The NETCONF protocol [RFC6241] uses XML [W3C.REC-xml-20081126] for
	encoding data in its Content Layer. Other management protocols might		encoding data in its Content Layer. Other management protocols might
	want to use other encodings while still benefiting from using YANG		want to use other encodings while still benefiting from using YANG
	[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis] as the data modeling language.		[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis] as the data modeling language.
	For example, the RESTCONF protocol [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf]		For example, the RESTCONF protocol [I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf]
	skipping to change at page 10, line 20		skipping to change at page 10, line 20
	"reporting-entity": {		"reporting-entity": {
	"card": "Ethernet0"		"card": "Ethernet0"
	},		},
	"severity": "major"		"severity": "major"
	}		}
	}		}
	}		}
	5.6. The "anyxml" Data Node		5.6. The "anyxml" Data Node
	An anyxml instance is encoded as a JSON name/value pair which MUST		An anyxml instance is encoded as a JSON name/value pair. The value
	satisfy I-JSON constraints. Otherwise it is unrestricted, i.e., the		MUST satisfy I-JSON constraints.
	value can be an object, array, number, string or one of the literals
	"true", "false" and "null".
	There is no universal procedure for mapping JSON-encoded anyxml
	instances to XML, and vice versa.
	Example: For the anyxml definition		Example: For the anyxml definition
	anyxml bar;		anyxml bar;
	the following is a valid JSON-encoded instance:		the following is a valid JSON-encoded instance:
	"bar": [true, null, true]		"bar": [true, null, true]
			5.7. Metadata Objects
			Apart from instances of YANG data nodes, a JSON document MAY contain
			special object members whose name starts with the "@" character
			(COMMERCIAL AT). Such members are used for special purposes such as
			encoding metadata [I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-metadata]. Exact syntax and
			semantics of such members are outside the scope of this document.
	6. Representing YANG Data Types in JSON Values		6. Representing YANG Data Types in JSON Values
	The type of the JSON value in an instance of the leaf or leaf-list		The type of the JSON value in an instance of the leaf or leaf-list
	data node depends on the type of that data node as specified in the		data node depends on the type of that data node as specified in the
	following subsections.		following subsections.
	6.1. Numeric Types		6.1. Numeric Types
	A value of the types "int8", "int16", "int32", "uint8", "uint16" and		A value of the types "int8", "int16", "int32", "uint8", "uint16" and
	"uint32" is represented as a JSON number.		"uint32" is represented as a JSON number.
	skipping to change at page 15, line 36		skipping to change at page 15, line 36
	The author wishes to thank Andy Bierman, Martin Bjorklund, Dean		The author wishes to thank Andy Bierman, Martin Bjorklund, Dean
	Bogdanovic, Balazs Lengyel, Juergen Schoenwaelder and Phil Shafer for		Bogdanovic, Balazs Lengyel, Juergen Schoenwaelder and Phil Shafer for
	their helpful comments and suggestions.		their helpful comments and suggestions.
	10. References		10. References
	10.1. Normative References		10.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis]		[I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis]
	Bjorklund, M., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",		Bjorklund, M., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",
	draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-07 (work in progress),		draft-ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis-09 (work in progress),
	September 2015.		December 2015.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax		[RFC5234] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
	Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, DOI 10.17487/		Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
	RFC5234, January 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5234, January 2008,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5234>.
	[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,		[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,
	and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol		and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol
	(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,		(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6241>.
	[RFC7159] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data		[RFC7159] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
	Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March		Interchange Format", RFC 7159, DOI 10.17487/RFC7159, March
	2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>.		2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7159>.
	[RFC7493] Bray, T., Ed., "The I-JSON Message Format", RFC 7493, DOI		[RFC7493] Bray, T., Ed., "The I-JSON Message Format", RFC 7493,
	10.17487/RFC7493, March 2015,		DOI 10.17487/RFC7493, March 2015,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7493>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7493>.
	10.2. Informative References		10.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf]		[I-D.ietf-netconf-restconf]
	Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF		Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF
	Protocol", draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-07 (work in		Protocol", draft-ietf-netconf-restconf-09 (work in
	progress), July 2015.		progress), December 2015.
			[I-D.ietf-netmod-yang-metadata]
			Lhotka, L., "Defining and Using Metadata with YANG",
			draft-ietf-netmod-yang-metadata-02 (work in progress),
			September 2015.
	[RFC7223] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface		[RFC7223] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface
	Management", RFC 7223, DOI 10.17487/RFC7223, May 2014,		Management", RFC 7223, DOI 10.17487/RFC7223, May 2014,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7223>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7223>.
	[W3C.REC-xml-20081126]		[W3C.REC-xml-20081126]
	Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E., and		Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, M., Maler, E., and
	F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth		F. Yergeau, "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Fifth
	Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-		Edition)", World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation REC-
	xml-20081126, November 2008,		xml-20081126, November 2008,
	skipping to change at page 18, line 42		skipping to change at page 18, line 47
	]		]
	}		}
	}		}
	Appendix B. Change Log		Appendix B. Change Log
	RFC Editor: Remove this section upon publication as an RFC.		RFC Editor: Remove this section upon publication as an RFC.
	B.1. Changes Between Revisions -05 and -06		B.1. Changes Between Revisions -05 and -06
			o General permit on object members whose names start with "@".
			B.2. Changes Between Revisions -05 and -06
	o More text and a new example about resolving union-type values.		o More text and a new example about resolving union-type values.
	B.2. Changes Between Revisions -04 and -05		B.3. Changes Between Revisions -04 and -05
	o Removed section "Validation of JSON-encoded Instance Data" and		o Removed section "Validation of JSON-encoded Instance Data" and
	other text about XML-JSON mapping.		other text about XML-JSON mapping.
	o Added section "Properties of the JSON Encoding".		o Added section "Properties of the JSON Encoding".
	B.3. Changes Between Revisions -03 and -04		B.4. Changes Between Revisions -03 and -04
	o I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis is used as a normative reference		o I-D.ietf-netmod-rfc6020bis is used as a normative reference
	instead of RFC 6020.		instead of RFC 6020.
	o Removed noncharacters as an I-JSON issue because it doesn't exist		o Removed noncharacters as an I-JSON issue because it doesn't exist
	in YANG 1.1.		in YANG 1.1.
	o Section about anydata encoding was added.		o Section about anydata encoding was added.
	o Require I-JSON for anyxml encoding.		o Require I-JSON for anyxml encoding.
	o Use ABNF for defining qualified name.		o Use ABNF for defining qualified name.
	B.4. Changes Between Revisions -02 and -03		B.5. Changes Between Revisions -02 and -03
	o Namespace encoding is defined without using RFC 2119 keywords.		o Namespace encoding is defined without using RFC 2119 keywords.
	o Specification for anyxml nodes was extended and clarified.		o Specification for anyxml nodes was extended and clarified.
	o Text about ordering of list entries was corrected.		o Text about ordering of list entries was corrected.
	B.5. Changes Between Revisions -01 and -02		B.6. Changes Between Revisions -01 and -02
	o Encoding of namespaces in instance-identifiers was changed.		o Encoding of namespaces in instance-identifiers was changed.
	o Text specifying the order of array elements in leaf-list and list		o Text specifying the order of array elements in leaf-list and list
	instances was added.		instances was added.
	B.6. Changes Between Revisions -00 and -01		B.7. Changes Between Revisions -00 and -01
	o Metadata encoding was moved to a separate I-D, draft-lhotka-		o Metadata encoding was moved to a separate I-D, draft-lhotka-
	netmod-yang-metadata.		netmod-yang-metadata.
	o JSON encoding is now defined directly rather than via XML-JSON		o JSON encoding is now defined directly rather than via XML-JSON
	mapping.		mapping.
	o The rules for namespace encoding has changed. This affect both		o The rules for namespace encoding has changed. This affect both
	node instance names and instance-identifiers.		node instance names and instance-identifiers.
End of changes. 19 change blocks.
	32 lines changed or deleted		46 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/