ITU-T A.5 reference justification

Home : ITU-T Home : ITU-T Work Programme : Q.MUD_IOT

ITU-T A.5 justification information for referenced document IETF RFC 8348 (2018) in draft Q.MUD_IOT

Clear description of the referenced document:

Name:	IETF RFC 8348 (2018)
Title:	A YANG Data Model for Hardware Management

Status of approval:

This document is an approved IETF RFC.

Justification for the specific reference:

RFC 8348 defines a standard YANG data model (“ietf-hardware”) and associated modules for managing hardware components of a single server—configuration, state, properties and statistics. In the context of IoT device security, certification and test frameworks, referencing RFC 8348 allows standardized representation and management of hardware elements (e.g., inventory, component health) which may be used in security testing, monitoring or device profiling.

Current information, if any, about IPR issues:

Information on IPR issues is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/ Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?rfc=8348

Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:

RFC 8348 is widely referenced by network and device management communities; it supports NMDA (Network Management Datastore Architecture) compliance and aligns with broader YANG-model ecosystem. It has been adopted in server and device management frameworks.

The degree of stability or maturity of the document:

Published 2018; stable and used in implementations of hardware management modules.

Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:

Aligns with RFC 7950 (YANG) and RFC 8342 (NMDA). Serves as a base for further YANG models (e.g., network-wide inventory models).

Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate/
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,/
./
/
[RFC3433] Bierman, A., Romascanu, D., and K. Norseth, "Entity Sensor/
Management Information Base", RFC 3433,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC3433, December 2002,/
./
/
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004,/
./
/
[RFC4268] Chisholm, S. and D. Perkins, "Entity State MIB", RFC 4268,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC4268, November 2005,/
./
/
[RFC5246] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security/
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,/
./
/
[RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for/
the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010,/
/
[RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed.,/
and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol/
(NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011,/
./
/
[RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure/
Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011,/
./
/
[RFC6933] Bierman, A., Romascanu, D., Quittek, J., and M./
Chandramouli, "Entity MIB (Version 4)", RFC 6933,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC6933, May 2013,/
./
/
[RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types",/
RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013,/
./
/
[RFC7950] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "The YANG 1.1 Data Modeling Language",/
RFC 7950, DOI 10.17487/RFC7950, August 2016,/
./
/
[RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF/
Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017,/
./
/
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC/
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,/
May 2017, ./
/
[RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration/
Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018,/
./
/
[RFC8342] Bjorklund, M., Schoenwaelder, J., Shafer, P., Watsen, K.,/
and R. Wilton, "Network Management Datastore Architecture/
(NMDA)", RFC 8342, DOI 10.17487/RFC8342, March 2018,/
.

Qualification of ISOC/IETF:

9.1-9.6     Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7     The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8     Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.

10.

Other (for any supplementary information):

None

Note: This form is based on Recommendation ITU-T A.5

Connecting the world and beyond

ITU-T work programme