Re: [i2rs] I-D Action: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-09.txt

Susan Hares <> Wed, 21 August 2019 23:14 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0268120043 for <>; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 16:14:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8OMJRaeX2jNs for <>; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 16:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C299120110 for <>; Wed, 21 Aug 2019 16:13:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=;
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 19:13:54 -0400
In-Reply-To: <>
Importance: normal
From: Susan Hares <>
To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <>, tom petch <>, 'Qin Wu' <>, "" <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=""
Message-ID: <1566429236_132463@FUMC-WEB2>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [i2rs] I-D Action: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-09.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 23:14:03 -0000

RobI knew about all these efforts with IEEE.  My suggested approach to Qin aligns with yours.  However I am glad to talk to ADs to check Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7 edge, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone
-------- Original message --------From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <> Date: 8/21/19  1:05 PM  (GMT-05:00) To: tom petch <>, Susan Hares <>, 'Qin Wu' <>, Subject: RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-09.txt Hi Tom,I've no issues with Sue checking with the ADs, but it might be helpful to point out: - There is already a regular IEEE/IETF liaison meeting that invariable includes discussion on YANG issues.  The sub-interface VLAN YANG model was part of this meeting for several years (due to technology overlap). - The VLAN definitions are in ieee802-dot1q-types.yang because (i) that is what we asked them to do, and (ii) they own the technology, and want to maintain control over it. - Generally, I think that IEEE and IETF currently have good form working together.  Of course, that could change in the future, but I suspect that if the IEEE decided to completely ditch YANG then I would expect them to be willing to find a solution for ieee802-dot1q-types.yang as well.Also looking at this from the other direction, if we want to redefine these types then I think that we would risk slowing down the draft to get permission from the IEEE 802.1 WG that they are happy for us to redefine these types (my initial instinct from my previous interactions is that IEEE 802.1 WG would probably not be happy - although of course I do not and cannot speak for them!)Thanks,Rob> -----Original Message-----> From: i2rs <> On Behalf Of tom petch> Sent: 21 August 2019 17:38> To: Susan Hares <>; 'Qin Wu' <>;>> Subject: Re: [i2rs] I-D Action: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-> 09.txt> > ----- Original Message -----> From: "Susan Hares" <>> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 2:35 PM> > Tom:> > Would you like me to check with the NM/OPS AD as well on this point?> They> may have an agreement with the IEEE folks on yang models.> > <tp>> > Sue> > Yes please.> > I have posted to Netmod where Rob Wilton thinks that it is fine and copied> it to Scott Mansfield.  My unease is rather vague that the IETF and IEEE> may take separate paths, on YANG, at some point. I see this not as> technical, where IEEE clearly have the skills in 802, but rather as> political or management, noting that the tools do not cope with this, as> Qin has found, that the module does not appear in the IANA registry (and> cannot from 802.1Q as it is RFC Required), that Rob sees the reference as> 801.1Qcp and not 802.1Q and so on.  We are making the IETF dependent on> something we have no control and little influence over.> > I would like an AD to say that they can see the issues and are content> that there will be no problem in future (I may turn round in five years> time and say 'I told you so' but that is business as usual, for me).> > Tom Petch> > Cheerily, Sue> > -----Original Message-----> From: tom petch []> Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2019 4:53 AM> To: Qin Wu;> Cc: Susan Hares> > Qin> > You had a note in -07 about whether or not to import definitions from> draft-ietf-softwire; and now I see that -09 imports definitions from IEEE> 802.1Q.> > Um.  Different.> > I have seen this before but in an I-D that AFAICT never progressed.> > I am uncertain what the implications of this are, in terms of the> evolution of the model, of the YANG language and so on, given the> different philosophies of the IETF and IEEE.  I think that it needs a> wider review than it will get on this list so I will flag this to NETMOD> and perhaps again at IETF Last call.> > Tom Petch> > > ----- Original Message -----> From: "Qin Wu" <>> To: <>> Cc: "Susan Hares" <>; "tom petch" <>> Sent: Monday, August 19, 2019 8:08 AM> > > v-09 is posted to address Tom's comments.> > The diff is:> >>> gy-09> > Becuase datatracker pyang integration tool issue, Data model> "ieee802-dot1q-types" can not been found> > And imported into the model defined in this draft.> >> > -Qin> > -----邮件原件-----> > 发件人: I-D-Announce [] 代表>> > 发送时间: 2019年8月19日 15:04> > 收件人:> > 抄送:> > 主题: I-D Action: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-09.txt> >> >> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts> directories.> > This draft is a work item of the Interface to the Routing System WG of> the IETF.> >> >         Title           : A YANG Data Model for Layer-2 Network> Topologies> >         Authors         : Jie Dong> >                           Xiugang Wei> >                           Qin Wu> >                           Mohamed Boucadair> >                           Anders Liu> > Filename        : draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-09.txt> > Pages           : 31> > Date            : 2019-08-19> >> > Abstract:> >    This document defines a YANG data model for Layer 2 network> >    topologies.> >> > Editorial Note (To be removed by RFC Editor)> >> >    Please update these statements within the document with the RFC> >    number to be assigned to this document:> >> >    o  "This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX;"> >> >    o  "RFC XXXX: A YANG Data Model for Layer-2 Network Topologies";> >> >    o  reference: RFC XXXX> >> >    Please update the "revision" date of the YANG module.> >> >> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:> >>> y/> >> > There are also htmlized versions available at:> >>> >>> pology-09> >> > A diff from the previous version is available at:> >>> gy-09> >> >> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at>> >> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:> >> >> > _______________________________________________> > I-D-Announce mailing list> >> >> > Internet-Draft directories: or>> >> > > _______________________________________________> i2rs mailing list>>