Re: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04

"Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com> Tue, 08 May 2018 02:06 UTC

Return-Path: <jie.dong@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C3DA12D874 for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 May 2018 19:06:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 W81MQHQuQjBr for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 May 2018 19:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B18C612D871 for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 May 2018 19:06:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.106]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 5641C5B6CED69; Tue, 8 May 2018 03:06:01 +0100 (IST)
Received: from NKGEML411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.70) by lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Tue, 8 May 2018 03:06:02 +0100
Received: from NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.29]) by nkgeml411-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.70]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Tue, 8 May 2018 10:05:55 +0800
From: "Dongjie (Jimmy)" <jie.dong@huawei.com>
To: Susan Hares <shares@ndzh.com>, 'Ladislav Lhotka' <lhotka@nic.cz>
CC: "i2rs@ietf.org" <i2rs@ietf.org>, 'Martin Vigoureux' <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04
Thread-Index: AQHT4hoIU9osNzC9q0uYjvWwfuv4MqQd3dlggAGnyACABY4zQA==
Date: Tue, 08 May 2018 02:05:55 +0000
Message-ID: <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92798449F5E@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <152526794842.11272.8213634409290285584@ietfa.amsl.com> <76CD132C3ADEF848BD84D028D243C92798440318@NKGEML515-MBS.china.huawei.com> <00c001d3e3e7$f9b18e70$ed14ab50$@ndzh.com>
In-Reply-To: <00c001d3e3e7$f9b18e70$ed14ab50$@ndzh.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.130.151.75]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/BuWEGY2rMBWLb-T3Aq6Nrk3oEc4>
Subject: Re: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04
X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <i2rs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/i2rs/>
List-Post: <mailto:i2rs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs>, <mailto:i2rs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 May 2018 02:06:08 -0000

Hi Sue, 

I agree Chris's comment is generic and applicable to all topology models, and what Alex suggested could be a solution to it. 

And your proposal looks good to us (coauthors of L2 model).

Best regards,
Jie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Susan Hares [mailto:shares@ndzh.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2018 4:39 AM
> To: Dongjie (Jimmy) <jie.dong@huawei.com>; 'Ladislav Lhotka' <lhotka@nic.cz>
> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; 'Martin Vigoureux' <martin.vigoureux@nokia.com>
> Subject: RE: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04
> 
> Jie and Lada:
> 
> I've recently listened to the I2RS meeting in IETF 101.
> 
> Chris Hopps asked about the notifications in L2.  He was asking about a more
> general use of the notification that might be useful in the
> 
> I'm not really sure how to approach responding to his operational request - since
> it really impacts all topology models.  My inclination is to push this draft through
> into RFC usage, and then to work through a "-bis"
> functionality.
> 
> Jie - would you ask the individuals pushing for L2 model if that works for them.
> 
> Lada - would you ask the Yang doctors if this is the right approach to take.
> Of course, this might be easier if we had versioning instead of a model name
> change.
> 
> Sue Hares
> -----Original Message-----
> From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dongjie (Jimmy)
> Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 10:09 PM
> To: Ladislav Lhotka; yang-doctors@ietf.org
> Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org;
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology.all@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [i2rs] Yangdoctors early review of
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04
> 
> Hi Lada,
> 
> Thanks a lot for your review comments. Please see some replies inline:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ladislav Lhotka [mailto:lhotka@nic.cz]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 9:32 PM
> > To: yang-doctors@ietf.org
> > Cc: i2rs@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org;
> > draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology.all@ietf.org
> > Subject: Yangdoctors early review of
> > draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-04
> >
> > Reviewer: Ladislav Lhotka
> > Review result: Ready
> >
> > This draft and YANG modules contained therein fit into the framework
> > of I2RS network topology models. I have no substantial comments, from
> > the YANG point of view this document is ready to be published.
> >
> > Comments and questions:
> >
> > 1. What is the purpose of the 'flag-type' type and 'flag-identity'
> identity?
> > There are no identities derived from the latter.
> 
> The "flag-type" type is used in the grouping "l2-network-attributes",
> "l2-node-attributes" and "l2-link-attributes".
> 
> While there is no identities derived from the "flag-identity", it is used in the
> typedef flag-type. Is this OK?
> 
> > 2. Some descriptions overuse capitalization. For example, instead of
> > 'VLAN
> Name'
> > I would suggest 'VLAN name'.
> 
> Thanks for catching this. Will fix in next revision.
> 
> > 3. An example of an instance document in an appendix would be very
> helpful.
> 
> Thanks for your suggestion. We will add an example to the appendix.
> 
> Best regards,
> Jie
> 
> _______________________________________________
> i2rs mailing list
> i2rs@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs