Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

Susan,

so are these YANG models regular YANG models or are these YANG models
specific to the yet to be defined I2RS protocol and yet to be defined
datastores?

I think this is the core of Martin's and my question. A simple clear
and concise answer would be nice.

/js

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 06:42:30AM -0500, Susan Hares wrote:
> Juergen: 
> 
> Yep.  That's the charter.  draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo-10.txt is a
> generic topology model.  draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08.txt is a
> generic topology for L3 unicast.   These support topology extension for
> non-I2RS user.  We met the milestone and deliver the YANG Modules to the
> IESG.    We discussed the "write" feature during WG LC and in the WG.   We
> passed this by AD Benoit Claise who agreed to the reasons present by the
> draft authors.  
> 
> Kinda' missed your comments in the normal comment period (WG LC, IETF LC). 
> 
> Sue 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: i2rs [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 5:15 PM
> To: Susan Hares
> Cc: [e-mail]; 'Martin Bjorklund';
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 'Robert
> Varga'; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Perhaps just adding to the confusion, here is what the WG charter
> says:
> 
>     o The ability to extract information about topology from the network.
>       Injection and creation of topology will not be considered as a work
>       item. Such topology-related models will be based on a generic
>       topology model to support multiple uses; the generic topology model
>       should support topology extension for non-I2RS uses.
> 
> And as a milestone:
> 
>   Dec 2016 - Request Publication of Protocol Independent Topology Data
> Models
> 
> /js
> 
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:06:04PM -0500, Susan Hares wrote:
> > Robert and Martin: 
> > 
> > I agree with Robert that the current implementations of the ODL 
> > topology models are handled as part of the configuration data store with
> ephemeral
> > state.   I will point out that these implementation are pre-standards
> > implementations of the I2RS YANG Data model.  
> > 
> > While standardizing the topology data models, the I2RS WG have been 
> > asked to align with the draft-ietf-netmod-revised-datastores-00.txt 
> > NETMOD WG document.  This NETMOD WG document moves the I2RS ephemeral data
> store from
> > configuration data store to a Control Plane data store.   If we follow
> this
> > draft, the I2RS Topology models are part of the I2RS ephemeral data store.
> > If you disagree with the placement of the Topology data models, please 
> > indicate this to the NETMOD WG and to Benoit.  Could you propose a way 
> > that you would see the ephemeral state working with the configuration data
> store
> > to the NETMOD WG?   
> > 
> > Quite frankly, I feel a bit of whip-lash on this topic.   NETMOD WG asks
> for
> > Control Plane Data store.  You ask for configuration data store (which was
> > the I2RS initial proposal).   It is possible for either one to work for
> I2RS
> > Topology models - if the right details are taken care of.   How do we make
> > progress on choosing one method so we can write the I2RS Topology 
> > Models security considerations.?
> > 
> > Sue
> >   
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Varga [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 4:11 PM
> > To: Martin Bjorklund; [e-mail]
> > Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> > [e-mail]; [e-mail]; 
> > [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> > Subject: Re: [i2rs] Kathleen Moriarty's No Objection on
> > draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-08: (with COMMENT)
> > 
> > On 01/23/2017 09:26 PM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> > >> I'm pulling your questions to the top of this email. 
> > >>
> > >>  
> > >>
> > >> Question 1: Ok.  Just to make sure I understand this correctly - 
> > >> these topology models are intended to be I2RS-specific, and they 
> > >> cannot be used for any other purpose.  If anyone needs a general 
> > >> topology model outside of the I2RS protocol, they will have to 
> > >> design their own model.  Is this correct?
> > >>
> > >>  
> > >>
> > >> Response 1:  Not really.  
> > > Ok, so are you saying that the models are in fact generic, and can 
> > > be used outside of I2RS?  I.e., they *can* be used with the normal 
> > > configuration datastores?
> > > 
> > 
> > From implementation experience, yes, they can be used for storing 
> > configuration. OpenDaylight uses (an ancient predecessor of) 
> > yang-network-topo to store configure details about devices in its 
> > managed networks.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Robert
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
> Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
> Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
> 

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>