OpenConfig, IETF, and Cisco native YANG models differ mainly in scope and implementation focus. IETF models are standards-based and are intended to cover common protocol or interface functions across vendors. OpenConfig models are vendor-neutral operational and configuration models developed for broad network automation use cases and often provide a more detailed service or operational structure than the corresponding baseline IETF model. Cisco native models are device and operating-system specific, which means they usually expose the most complete Cisco feature coverage but are less portable across vendors. For the question wording, OpenConfig is more comprehensive than IETF when configuring the same general feature in a multivendor environment, because OpenConfig commonly defines richer operational and configuration containers beyond the minimum standards model. Option B is incorrect because Cisco native models are not generally less comprehensive than OpenConfig on Cisco devices. Option C is also incorrect for the same reason. Option D reverses the usual relationship. Reference topics: YANG model families, IETF models, OpenConfig models, Cisco native YANG models, model-driven programmability.
Contribute your Thoughts:
Chosen Answer:
This is a voting comment (?). You can switch to a simple comment. It is better to Upvote an existing comment if you don't have anything to add.
Submit