Re: [i2rs] Benoit Claise's Discuss on draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-14: (with DISCUSS)

Hi Benoit,

I am not sure I understand your comment?  I was referring to the typedef
router-id, which we define in example-ospf-topology.  We made many changes
to make it clear that this is just an example, not a part of the actual
model, reflected in the description, naming, removal of contact and revision
information, etc.  

The tree diagram in section 5 is for the ietf-l3-unicast-topology module.
It is not part of an example.  The same is true for the grouping
l3-node-attributes.  It is part of the model.  

The example-ospf-topology model serves as an example as to how the model
might be refined/extended for other topologies.  As stated: "This module is
intended to serve as an example that illustrates how the general topology
model can be refined across multiple levels."  The sentence at the top of
the section "Extending the model - Example OSPF Topology - Model Overview"
states (slightly rephrased with inserted ", in this case") to "The following
model shows how the Layer 3 Unicast topology model can be extended, in this
case to cover OSFP topologies."

Does this clarify or did you mean something else? 

Thanks
--- Alex

-----Original Message-----
From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 3:33 AM
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology@ietf.org; i2rs@ietf.org;
i2rs-chairs@ietf.org; shares@ndzh.com
Subject: [i2rs] Benoit Claise's Discuss on
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-14: (with DISCUSS)

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology-14: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l3-topology/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

We're making progress. Thanks.

>>
>> 4.
>>
>>         leaf-list router-id {
>>             type inet:ip-address;
>>             description
>>               "Router-id for the node";
>>           }
>>
>> My initial DISCUSS was: We don't want to wait for
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-00 (btw, 
>> we should expedite this publication), but any good reason why this is 
>> aligned with its definition?
>>      typedef router-id {
>>         type yang:dotted-quad;
>>         description
>>           "A 32-bit number in the dotted quad format assigned to each
>>            router. This number uniquely identifies the router within an
>>            Autonomous System.";
>>       }
>>
>> My NEW DISCUSS: since is in IETF LC and on the telechat on Oct 12th, 
>> it makes sense to import its router-id
>
> <ALEX> This is only used in the example.  The point of the example is 
> to show how the model can be extended, not to define something 
> normative, hence I don't think there is a need to introduce a 
> dependency here which would only be distracting.
> </ALEX>
Can you help me understand how this is an example?
Section 5

   module: ietf-l3-unicast-topology
     augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nw:network-types:
       +--rw l3-unicast-topology!
     augment /nw:networks/nw:network:
       +--rw l3-topology-attributes
          +--rw name?   string
          +--rw flag*   l3-flag-type
     augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node:
       +--rw l3-node-attributes
          +--rw name?        inet:domain-name
          +--rw flag*        node-flag-type
          +--rw router-id*   inet:ip-address
          +--rw prefix* [prefix]
             +--rw prefix    inet:ip-prefix
             +--rw metric?   uint32
             +--rw flag*     prefix-flag-type

And section 6:

     grouping l3-node-attributes {
       description "L3 node scope attributes";
       container l3-node-attributes {
         description
           "Containing node attributes";
         leaf name {
           type inet:domain-name;
           description
             "Node name";
         }
         leaf-list flag {
           type node-flag-type;
           description
             "Node flags";
         }
         leaf-list router-id {
           type inet:ip-address;
           description
             "Router-id for the node";
         }
         list prefix {
           key "prefix";
           description
             "A list of prefixes along with their attributes";
           uses l3-prefix-attributes;
         }
       }
     }

A different view at
https://www.yangcatalog.org/yang-search/yang_tree.php?module=ietf-l3-unicast
-topology#

_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
i2rs@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs