Re: [CCAMP] [netmod] 802.3 Ethernet YANG (802.3cp) and IETF overlap

Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Thu, 23 March 2017 01:26 UTC

Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ccamp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B9A8128AB0; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id b3X8v-_dXp4X; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg0-x242.google.com (mail-pg0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6DCA12422F; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg0-x242.google.com with SMTP id g2so33204758pge.2; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references :to; bh=WSY9TzEyy4Xz04WNJfN81CqF4ysbCwhXMLx5RU0KreU=; b=Q9u8GSXOQos+3iGs31+s9wjHIoHRX9te4Yu+MKA4UWsnNDeP1K0Q0bWwedpZsfHyGO ay5yxmhrfu/HMwIhIlEsvPFut4uF3MeYiF6G3iPVQrc2xc2OaHSxCyt7L1ccq5BoDkok VkEx2FW6mHQpf4gAKwfnvZrnwa4k44q9Wu8GtUToXbPRm8dT36p9u3p5OfAztmLzlkHx 7rMVIk4dZbd9jNegntL0OTPrBXxu3GOnyAUyGE+7+R+/oyq/0FCJ5C7uaYuMspjDGnAd BM298stJyVp4+Iu4OaJ7USOCGN/YlAiRF/XlNb8GtrcEWhvdWQ7vG++icAgL/jaUajjw 411g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=WSY9TzEyy4Xz04WNJfN81CqF4ysbCwhXMLx5RU0KreU=; b=Wv/U8V7J7XRnE8c5JYJcr/TgqB8KKjXyrzjDwm2bVt6ZtNumowhRPYVuDUfnBFVlfo iZnGyBUn+B4dgkc8VuaHyGPTdX2WSVK21UpWfDRuNP3QwsQ0/535O7PZexwUSaHkFcWm phAuj8Wm7bznOE6M9/NkjXhlgzh0x8LuRE9BNtItkIC9h8cNmwoYYSOS5xxLLSgJU9w8 GIKc8CjqTupLeyz4ebT4YjwvgH4b0CU/SbeAduL3kJR9Rl4h1KjCWiQNbNwXT4b6/bbs HmO0EXFWFRICoeGgs/g1mS3pAZ0HrNN35ufRHpXv7B9kJHrgE5zW0fyQm+ytYT1OxkhC TW/g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H2rrUiUqXDEJmZCGBo2KKAedHVKlvFuvdomu/3TTejz32WYBZr2MxYzJewSKOfPkA==
X-Received: by 10.99.61.201 with SMTP id k192mr14750631pga.68.1490232362160; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2602:306:cf77:df90:8934:e85:444c:1d55? ([2602:306:cf77:df90:8934:e85:444c:1d55]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t187sm6139194pfb.116.2017.03.22.18.26.01 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:01 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5887CB5C-9DD9-44C7-9EAC-80FD39F8A88F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <59ea5342-0973-8f12-7d9a-27154cf42d80@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 18:26:00 -0700
Cc: NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>, ccamp@ietf.org
Message-Id: <06F5F172-8C4A-4272-9815-DECE13CB4F19@gmail.com>
References: <59ea5342-0973-8f12-7d9a-27154cf42d80@cisco.com>
To: Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ccamp/V5fkQBcRqPbK_TxkU5To_JSwz4A>
Subject: Re: [CCAMP] [netmod] 802.3 Ethernet YANG (802.3cp) and IETF overlap
X-BeenThere: ccamp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion list for the CCAMP working group <ccamp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ccamp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ccamp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ccamp>, <mailto:ccamp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 01:26:05 -0000

> On Mar 22, 2017, at 8:21 AM, Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm participating in the 802.3 task force (802.3cf) to produce standard YANG models for Ethernet interfaces and protocols covered by the IEEE 802.3 Ethernet Working Group.
> 
> As part of my involvement with that group, I want to highlight a couple of issues that arose in that forum that may be of interest to various WGs in IETF.
> 
> This email, and accompanying slides, represents my personal views, and do not represent any formal IEEE position.  However, both this email and the accompanying slides have been reviewed in an 802.3cf task force meeting, and there were no objections to the content, or my sending of this email to IETF.
> 
> I also raised these issues (with an earlier set of slides) as part of the IETF/IEEE liaison meeting on 31st January, and the consensus was generally supportive of this approach, with the agreed next steps to contact the NETMOD and CCAMP chairs, which I have done, and the WGs (hence this email):
> 
> As part of that YANG modelling work, there is an aim to define a clean boundary of what manageability data should be specified within 802.3 and what belongs outside the 802.3 specifications.
> 
> The definition that the task force is converging on is that everything related to Ethernet, covered by 802.3, that can be expressed in terms of the 802.3 clause 30 manageability definitions, should be modeled in 802.3.  I.e. broadly everything that is covered by 802.3.1 today.  But any manageability information that cannot be related to clause 30 definitions should be specified outside of 802.3.  Note, where appropriate, additional clause 30 definitions may be added to fix any mistakes or glaring gaps.
> 
> To this end, there are a couple of areas between IETF and 802.3 that don't necessarily look like they are entirely in the right place, in particular:
> 
> 1) The RMON MIB (RFC 2819) defines (along with other non-Ethernet related content) some Ethernet specific statistics that would be better co-located with the Ethernet interface YANG model being defined in 802.3cp.  Hence, the proposal is to subsume the appropriate Ethernet statistics from the RMON MIB into a single combined reference set defined in 802.3cp.
> 2) The RMON MIB also defines some Ethernet specific statistics that can't be defined as part of 802.3cf because they don't relate to 802.3 clause 30 registers, but are still widely supported by vendors, and should be modeled in YANG.  The proposal is that definitions related to these counters could be added as part of the Ethernet-like module draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-03 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang/>, or perhaps a related Ethernet module in the same draft.
> 
> 3) The Power-Ethernet MIB (defined in RFC 3621, but also referenced from RFC 7460), was originally specified in IETF, but ownership later transferred to 802.3 (via RFC 7448).  Whilst working on the Power over Ethernet YANG model it has become clear that not all of the attributes defined in the MIB map to the underlying 802.3 clause 30 definitions.  Further, it looks like parts of this YANG model would be better defined as extensions to the Entity YANG model being defined in NETMOD.  The proposal is       that the parts of the Power over Ethernet YANG model that can be directly related to clause 30 definitions (e.g. pethPsePortTable) should be defined in 802.3cf, but that the remaining parts (e.g., pethMainPseObjects ) can hopefully be standardized in IETF.
> 
> 
> Do you have any comments, or concerns, on the 3 proposals above?
> 
Having sat on some of the meeting with Robert in IEEE, I would agree that the three proposals is the cleanest approach to splitting the work. It would have ideal that there was one model each for Ethernet interface and all the statistics, and one for POE, but ...
> Regards,
> Rob Wilton
> <wilton_8023cf_ethernet_interface_statistics_3.pptx>_______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod