Re: [i2rs] l3-topology-attributes in RFC8346

Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com> Mon, 24 September 2018 22:14 UTC

Return-Path: <alexander.clemm@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 861C8131154 for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-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 AqJq_5zOKB5j for <i2rs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (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 491DB130F01 for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:14:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id B3D1AA4422F20 for <i2rs@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 23:14:23 +0100 (IST)
Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.39) by LHREML710-CAH.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.399.0; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 23:14:25 +0100
Received: from SJCEML521-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.47]) by SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.77]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 15:14:22 -0700
From: Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com>
To: Benoit Tremblay <benoit@kaloom.com>, "i2rs@ietf.org" <i2rs@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: l3-topology-attributes in RFC8346
Thread-Index: AQHUUqnoHlmab3DQEUKMg5WsQf5p2KT/8uvg
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 22:14:21 +0000
Message-ID: <644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0EB69B8D@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <1537644280.4727.48.camel@kaloom.com>
In-Reply-To: <1537644280.4727.48.camel@kaloom.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.193.35.92]
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="_004_644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0EB69B8Dsjceml521mbxchi_"; type="multipart/alternative"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2rs/IL_6wXUmxDkr_Vcr25DgYK1DdKo>
Subject: Re: [i2rs] l3-topology-attributes in RFC8346
X-BeenThere: i2rs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 22:14:30 -0000

Hi Benoit,

the names are what they are.  The attributes contained in l3-topology-attributes are related to l3 topology, and are introduced in module “ietf-l3-unicast-topology.  So, I think you can argue that the name does make sense.  Could one have made a different decision?  This is probably a moot point by now.  If you are concerned that the l2-network-topology draft is introducing a similar container but naming it differently, this is something that might be discussed with the authors of the other draft.

--- Alex

From: i2rs [mailto:i2rs-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Tremblay
Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2018 12:25 PM
To: i2rs@ietf.org
Subject: [i2rs] l3-topology-attributes in RFC8346

Hello all,

(resending as the first one apparently did not made it through)

Has anyone noticed that the network object has an attribute called l3-topology-attribute?
Shouldn't that be l3-network-attrtibutes?
This clashes with any other objects in the RFC that have a l3-<object>-attributes : l3-node-attributes, l3-link-attributes, l3-termination-point-attributes.

This also clashes with the draft for l2-topology (draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-l2-network-topology-05) that augments network with l2-network-attributes.

Any motivation for this difference?

Regards,
Benoit


--
[logo]
Benoit Tremblay
Directeur R&D
+1 514 452-0966

*** Notice de confidentialité ***
Ce message et tout fichier attaché sont confidentiels. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire visé ou son mandataire chargé de lui transmettre ce document, soyez avisé qu'il est expressément interdit d'en divulguer la teneur, de le copier ou de le distribuer. Si vous avez reçu cette communication par erreur, veuillez en informer immédiatement l'expéditeur par courriel et détruire le présent message.

*** Disclaimer ***
This message and any attachments are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or his authorized agent, please be advised that copying, distributing or revealing the contents of this message is expressly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, kindly notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message from your system.