-
-
soomanyquestions
newbie
- Posts: 35
- Joined:
NETCONF / YANG
Is there any plans to support configuration and management via NETCONF? This would allow mikrotik devices to be used in some sorts of SDN scenarios which I think would be beneficial to mikrotik.
Re: NETCONF / YANG
There is no support for NETCONF on RouterOS.
But... There is a nice and usable API that will allow you to do just as much as with NETCONF.
See http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API
But... There is a nice and usable API that will allow you to do just as much as with NETCONF.
See http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API
-
-
soomanyquestions
newbie
- Posts: 35
- Joined:
Re: NETCONF / YANG
There is no support for NETCONF on RouterOS.
But... There is a nice and usable API that will allow you to do just as much as with NETCONF.
See http://wiki.mikrotik.com/wiki/Manual:API
Thats cool and all but it that isnt standards based... I cant input YANG models into that
Re: NETCONF / YANG
I agree, Netconf/YANG is becoming the defacto standard.
Email support@mikrotik.com and see what they have to say.
Email support@mikrotik.com and see what they have to say.
Re: NETCONF / YANG
Did Mikrotik respond as I am also interested in NETCONF being supported. Would make systems more standardised.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6241
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6241
-
-
brotherdust
Member Candidate
- Posts: 130
- Joined:
Re: NETCONF / YANG
Totally agree on this one. The quickest way they could do this would be to leverage the free version of Tail-f (now Cisco's) ConfD. Yes, I know it's Cisco; but the work is already done here and it's got a very permissive license. It would make sense to wrap this up into an NPK for RouterOS and call it good. Thoughts?
https://developer.cisco.com/site/confD/
https://developer.cisco.com/site/confD/
Re: NETCONF / YANG
++++++Totally agree on this one. The quickest way they could do this would be to leverage the free version of Tail-f (now Cisco's) ConfD. Yes, I know it's Cisco; but the work is already done here and it's got a very permissive license. It would make sense to wrap this up into an NPK for RouterOS and call it good. Thoughts?
https://developer.cisco.com/site/confD/
Re: NETCONF / YANG
I hate when good ideas like this just get crickets for response.
-
-
muetzekoeln
Member Candidate
- Posts: 167
- Joined:
Re: NETCONF / YANG
No. Maybe you can add it to a wishlist for ROS 8 features+++ 1. Is this around yet?
-
-
stevenjacobs
just joined
- Posts: 7
- Joined:
- Contact:
Re: NETCONF / YANG
+1
Netconf and data models would make automation on MikroTik devices so much easier, with less room for mistakes.
Netconf and data models would make automation on MikroTik devices so much easier, with less room for mistakes.
Re: NETCONF / YANG
Seeing the huge change to DevOps & NetOps
Feature support request: SUP-118950
Feature support request: SUP-118950
Re: NETCONF / YANG
Did anything happen with this support request?Seeing the huge change to DevOps & NetOps
Feature support request: SUP-118950