Re: [I2nsf] Hi, Paul. I am confusing that why you have done so many changes of the data model in current I2NSF NSF facing interface DM draft?

"Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <> Tue, 19 March 2019 05:38 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61EB1130EFA; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:38:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.988
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.988 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, T_HK_NAME_FM_MR_MRS=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16g95DogsnAY; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 554471277CE; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id w2so19489441wrt.11; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:38:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=iloim1NuEh+D+xFJ2uXouvFbMGMaWIphWoxJKI0iNx4=; b=CWculiEpRmZ9uN/fVxBtbE7ACHAMo4y/X99C8MpILWKAw2yetB5/l9FUpHL3UwA53n A4h+icfjl48LhP5mxqkKLDobbxSZx6g+h5il1jSINoITio/dAA7NEvskWc+wo1tR4tPN yO1c865vtLXE3s4G5lSzkHh/I11WvG/SxzsfKBYqwPa+cOJQGw3pA5rs4567N5ID1peU BeFy/raLA8P7OubMiyF+eVdacfL+BoFpDgs5WFLRRf+gmk8A1Hf8wdlmFRwRyK2Gynax 2HZM6udBE2zy0f7tiqumXWwXGsBS+GIQkTpX37cgC7/N1DdUj/96w4Du7PadF8Z71kj2 8fdg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=iloim1NuEh+D+xFJ2uXouvFbMGMaWIphWoxJKI0iNx4=; b=Au3a9r1DarFyv6/KtslfbvaBATxQ+VM/flfs5kLnI7swTeXp0F1w7uUEDq7rbOuvWw cYDuxgjPVJVd+tyky9n413n4umAwhH0Yp1Wdiwr6kVO9YDaun40kN2Ayw8tRbUne5ouC f6Y/g4QAhEEABYVXWcal2mTzcaCSPkoEw52rU8d68YC2ZoG5JE63TWX2/XVpmmqPm6AC xtOIOo32AfAkxKw/x+3naChSjB7vRfhrYA4652c+kksGa7kTAULwCAP6FTyR9Y07ZniA 1tBSoOGiKADo435TJVg6mmaI4oGFFfwk74GCaZuVMvI1KcgnAJ1uHlTrh84AH+uDWLHK GzBg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWQ+H9M3RLSZGubLGsOexjvJ2ig/gttZBDqRih/zOor04WWpE2t lWY2irxQKrKHVlfcTnT8VcR8txv2nrQdBfZYQNw=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxJnaIg3ShTeuUOnCX5TarR/ox8lUwB17SYg8AGYtxE1gI9+QbGgL1hM+96snveDTuPBGjXbMvgObW+o+etF+s=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:dd8c:: with SMTP id x12mr6465025wrl.262.1552973894809; Mon, 18 Mar 2019 22:38:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 14:37:37 +0900
Message-ID: <>
To: "Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent Dept)" <>
Cc: "" <>, Linda Dunbar <>, Yoav Nir <>,, "Mr. Jaehoon Paul Jeong" <>, Tom Petch <>, Operations and Management Area Working Group <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000587e1505846be911"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [I2nsf] Hi, Paul. I am confusing that why you have done so many changes of the data model in current I2NSF NSF facing interface DM draft?
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "*I2NSF: Interface to Network Security Functions mailing list*" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 05:38:20 -0000

Hi Frank,
During the WG Adoption Call for NSF Monitoring Data Model Draft,
there were comments on the formatting of the Monitoring YANG data model
from Tom Petch at OPSA WG.
We addressed most of his comments.

My team used the following RFCs for YANG tree and module formatting:
[RFC6087] Bierman, A., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of YANG Data
Model Documents",
RFC 6087, DOI 10.17487/RFC6087,
January 2011, <>;.

Also, my team synchronized the three I2NSF interfaces for three use cases:
- Firewall and Web Filter: Block SNS Access during Business Hours
- Deep Packet Inspection: Block Malicious VoIP/VoLTE Packets Coming to the
- Attack Mitigation: Mitigate HTTP and HTTPS Flood Attacks on a Company Web

However, our data models are synchronized with your NSF Capabilities
Information Model.

I believe the current data models are pretty mature for WGLC.


Best Regards,

On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 12:08 PM Xialiang (Frank, Network Standard & Patent
Dept) <>; wrote:

> Hi Paul,
> Sorry for raise this question a bit later, but I am wondering why your
> team have made so many changes to the existed and stable data model for the
> I2NSF NSF facing interface?
> B.R.
> Frank

Mr. Jaehoon (Paul) Jeong, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
Department of Software
Sungkyunkwan University
Office: +82-31-299-4957
Personal Homepage: