[bess] Review of draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang-04

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Thu, 23 May 2019 03:04 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9CB912004A for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2019 20:04:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3W4YtemvpFME for <bess@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 May 2019 20:04:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 034AA120152 for <bess@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 May 2019 20:04:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 80A911FC1CA69A93D74E for <bess@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:04:43 +0100 (IST)
Received: from lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:04:42 +0100
Received: from lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:04:43 +0100
Received: from NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com ( by lhreml701-chm.china.huawei.com ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 23 May 2019 04:04:42 +0100
Received: from NKGEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([]) by NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Thu, 23 May 2019 11:04:33 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
CC: "stephane.litkowski@orange.com" <stephane.litkowski@orange.com>
Thread-Topic: Review of draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang-04
Thread-Index: AdURE8hakxOV8Qp4TFOnH6CA7uro6w==
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 03:04:32 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA494874B@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAA494874Bnkgeml513mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/8zpsRFGwBgNIEzQ2GmQsdyrDfEo>
Subject: [bess] Review of draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang-04
X-BeenThere: bess@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess>, <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 03:04:50 -0000

I see draft-ietf-bess-l3vpn-yang-04 is buried in the BESS mailing list discussion and a bunches of BESS drafts that wait for progressing, it is really unfortunately
Two quick comments on section 3.2.6

1.       Why route-policy is repeated in two places, one is under vpn-targets, the other is under import-from-global? Is there any rationale behind this?

2.       Why tunnel policy is defined as string? How do we support fine granularity tunnel policy control?

e.g., how to support different tunnel encapsulation?