Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24
"Ms. Li HUANG" <bleuoisou@gmail.com> Thu, 23 December 2021 06:06 UTC
Return-Path: <bleuoisou@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC463A11C2; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:06:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 Jf5PDEIFLhxh; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:06:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com (mail-ed1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) (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 3CA053A11C0; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:06:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id q14so9678598edi.3; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:06:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Sc4iuwjtZ46JxjO507hExYJQllncP2mz25B5VBqd5Ug=; b=YU0yg+tiFqDHwn9cROY1ckqxeIaDnaPjIQe2pvv9nqVowNJMmkutecMFO4PFd05WjX K3caJMUtaIi1PJK4CxooGzW6a75Vlr2QOfsH85iXvOmk+uuJEngiRZBVn1sZxKrJfshn aVJKNx/+I15rvhgdHnt2GUgMBGaf2NYjVurCZuBEpPA61Qr4iDMaAvbpU2OyChZBdP7Y RvGTZVAGNHEZHvHMy8iP/dneS1BwE/i/DrSDFyLuIhhz/Dr5QtL9vxDT9oYbwSPcM840 YUt+dQspO0A8/COpoIjJGWxldNjtmrgGKVk2BvslPFOa6TWEYxO+vD/EJy4KIkiVdqHr OmGQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Sc4iuwjtZ46JxjO507hExYJQllncP2mz25B5VBqd5Ug=; b=yg07Qkv4A6iQ6UcvLiur86duFlBKbL9rMpOHL0RJnblOmnHDqSYe2Nad+ok24Ifg0e 5zVvhcy8WIGUPDBEZAVsAFN8OcFUk1YIVOxJqNtjmXAlejaMY2gnIXzOuPSQGGqI67xq lEmPpmvut4gKUj22GiRmvvYdiKHGHhkvXy+WZ/QQTclv4nzidz9iTrjlwOK5DvNBj/JH sSEdPt4bqrotPMSjWrLhaai1Ybu1YWbJ+q4i7Gr4patnOtLjstH8z8UD+V4XhMwltTyV RL+0CFvHd/Y3QwXGyR7e9VBCghJd7d+/veuMUk0BFts/c5HP4WZLc7I3oLIi/pq3EpXz 4FgQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532yS6bjT3KSB8GJ5avEWplVrAbvQTpPPkkVyaXeYWbA5RC1zvZE M4ipGWArL/jquUl5ST9c5KydrKa0nxlVR0mP7n0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzzGg2NWcmX2PoxY1lYIExPQQYx+JhgaE9B/BOTaGHgHzYHQZE9nHRdLbZeonvgHj0ZZcXAz1QewSAdQlMwQc=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2ce3:: with SMTP id hz3mr741029ejc.737.1640239588227; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 22:06:28 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <163722823173.27432.7026766423118638736@ietfa.amsl.com> <A698BBD7-DD36-485C-84DE-4949317322A8@gmx.com> <91989b7006674302acccea2d964bce65@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <91989b7006674302acccea2d964bce65@huawei.com>
From: "Ms. Li HUANG" <bleuoisou@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 14:06:16 +0800
Message-ID: <CAGGiuEakQLXoSd8f5kySX-cyKfKwgSVGidoW8aPBnb5D4hkR9g@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Liushucheng (Will LIU, Strategy & Industry Development)" <liushucheng=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: ianfarrer@gmx.com, dhcwg <dhcwg@ietf.org>, ops-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000000bf1305d3ca0a2a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dhcwg/ZQq-rrNp2I3AVlkUfjHip5RlulQ>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Dynamic Host Configuration <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dhcwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2021 06:06:39 -0000
Dec. 23 2021 14:04.hk You are so right, in dhcpv6 srv, for prefix, name pools getting more complex in rfc3315 duid changed motherboard sub-mac env. Sincerely Li HUANG On Thu, Dec 16, 2021, 15:06 Liushucheng (Will LIU, Strategy & Industry Development) <liushucheng=40huawei.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > Dear Ian, > > Sorry for being late. > Thanks for your reply. I had a long discussion on with several people to > try to provide some content example. My reply inline with [Will]. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: ianfarrer@gmx.com [mailto:ianfarrer@gmx.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 19, 2021 3:18 PM > > To: Liushucheng (Will LIU, Strategy & Industry Development) > > <liushucheng@huawei.com> > > Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org; dhcwg@ietf.org; > draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang.all@ietf.org; > > last-call@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24 > > > > Hi Will > > > > Many thanks for your review and comments. Please see inline below. > > > > Best regards, > > Ian > > > > > On 18. Nov 2021, at 10:37, Will LIU via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > Reviewer: Will LIU > > > Review result: Has Nits > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have reviewed draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-24 as part of the > > > Operational directorate's ongoing effort to review all IETF documents > > > being processed by the IESG. These comments were written with the > > > intent of improving the operational aspects of the IETF drafts. > > > Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD > > > reviews during the IESG review. Document editors and WG chairs should > > > treat these comments just like any other last call comments. > > > > > > “This document describes YANG data modules for the configuration and > > > management of DHCPv6 (Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 > > > RFC8415) servers, relays, and clients.” > > > > > > My overall view of the document is 'Has Nits'. > > > > > > ** Technical ** > > > > > > Page54, > > > 1. The DHCPv6 server may be bound to an interface to specify the > > > DHCPv6 address pool of the corresponding interface. > > > > [if - Interface configuration and binding the server function to specific > > interfaces/addresses is not covered in the ietf-dhc6-server module. > There is a > > lot of variance in the way that individual implementations configure > this (e.g. > > server/router/BNG), and also the class-selection logic that defines how > an > > individual request’s address/prefix pool and options are selected that > this best > > left to the implementor to define implementation specific YANG to cover > these > > areas. > > > > Examples of vendor specific configuration modules for the server’s base > > configuration and class-selector logic are given in Appendixes C & D. > > ] > > [Will] Agree this is not covered in the module and a lot of variance > exist. After checking the examples in Appendix, there is no example about > DHCPv6 server bounding to an interface to specific interfaces/addresses, > may I suggest add a short example like below? > > augment /if:interfaces/if:interface { > description > "Extend interface attribute."; > container dhcpv6-server-attribute { > description > "Configure DHCPv6 server interface function."; > > choice server-mode { > description > "Set dhcpv6 server mode in the Interface."; > case automatic-enable { > description > "Enable/disable dhcpv6 server automatic mode."; > leaf server-automatic-anable { > type boolean; > default "false"; > description > "Enable/disable dhcpv6 server automatic mode."; > } > } > case pool-name { > description > "Pool name."; > leaf pool-name { > type string { > length "1..31"; > } > description > "Pool name."; > } > } > } > leaf is-allow-hint { > type boolean; > default "false"; > description > "Enable/disable to allow the server to assign prefix according > to the client expectation."; > } > leaf preference { > type uint8 { > range "0..255"; > } > default "0"; > description > "The server priority in the advertise packet."; > } > leaf is-rapid { > type boolean; > default "false"; > description > "Enable/disable to support for fast allocation."; > } > leaf is-unicast { > type boolean; > default "false"; > description > "Enable/disable to specify the unicast communication between > client and server in the address renewal process."; > } > } > > > > > > 2. The key of container address-pools and container prefix-pools in > > > the DHCPv6 server may be changed to pool-name. > > > > [if - ‘pool-id’ was originally typed as being uint32 with the intention > that it > > was just a unique ID number for the pool. The type got changed to string > due > > to a recent review comment, But I think the intended use remains the > same - it > > is a unique identifier for the pool, whether the user choses a numeric > or a > > string based identifier as suits their requirements. > > > > My feeling is that pool-id is a suitable name for this function, but > would be > > happy to change if there is a good reason to use pool-name. > > ] > > > [Will] Agree to change 'pool-id’ to string. > > Regards, | 致礼! > Will LIU | 刘树成 > > > > > > > ** Editorial ** > > > > > > No. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Will (Shucheng LIU) > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dhcwg mailing list > dhcwg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg >
- [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-dhc… Will LIU via Datatracker
- Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf… ianfarrer
- Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf… Liushucheng (Will LIU, Strategy & Industry Development)
- Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf… Ms. Li HUANG
- Re: [dhcwg] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf… ianfarrer