Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04.txt
Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 20 March 2019 14:29 UTC
Return-Path: <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B61C71275E9 for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:29:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 GuvjXjea8C7b for <idr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CFD9126D00 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id v10so2142923iom.8 for <idr@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:29:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HHMWQiz4Zk98VxbdhBN/1wiaCAiRBfqbhZDcvE0lpFo=; b=W6GhyJVOcwlQa3ysQb+x9bRbbmXSdcZyb74A6TMXlH7ALa05/j1YyAbjQgEXc4hiR2 mnvraVJcIp5B0qLqTZ0zN0JsorZ+HdTuYx23d4mQlE86ghqlKFYv9A0m2RpcddlzXyCE ziHqx7GxOkvH5a4uDlCtxIaGlvTsn8UvghSIqWfJEmNGA9pdIEHP7zJamF/HaeWUmdkf QbAOrWdrUOJLFtqdS25OnmYQ3GhG0MZ9yMu2IEQbYEqDW/cnIQRm8J5rLRP/szHrmtI/ r8nNfYWL3bYs2zdIz4UnTzga6/30nKgVsTcp1IFLvaU1yZaSI6NQQsifU0UZxXPb1gKU SECw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HHMWQiz4Zk98VxbdhBN/1wiaCAiRBfqbhZDcvE0lpFo=; b=fQBCxWZelutCrMD0LIRyUxQhFlTmdgEY9JXqoEM+LEEyO9yz1POk3pGble5zzIWdWp SV7m9CKPt50HrI0L/adTN4a/oMZffq2VvIUltKh6GKiJ88Ac8zos/QmSfI43mVdb1qqf bGmQEnaI263tuGhJKGty2S+hrwHtiHk0fqG9YC8tBtyDEO572osCZcEgTWGi1ba7SSGj B5lpqDJEFEFiMKrqGyLp9epgzbVa9in9jppcNuIjU5WzkkXzGY5Y7XLYQ8ANGOGcJinv JFBICo3Ir0IT1+PrZ46n+dtXWKYqg0TpEIW9Fr26GBb6jNy7s1nEbbY7neXZQ36YeLYA FLeg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVWYM88f62AuQ9/xyX4QH2BCTmApncMFDv3Q3GfURIHttGiFitY yPxwdM02tchAMgXrvFOZEd9YzIqkG02Kid+x7vEYqAeIEqY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwrP/6w7HnrbLfntD3XT6iRgZb63U0vELFTd0f1FXDus2/eIupCZ7XxIGGtmcMVbTkv5MNzLbAUOh4EdbukHAQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a5e:9805:: with SMTP id s5mr5586017ioj.149.1553092165347; Wed, 20 Mar 2019 07:29:25 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <155120498877.852.8582818799698080818@ietfa.amsl.com> <68805692-5B0B-4406-92DD-50529E4F8F8D@gmail.com> <CAEz6PPRvvTXOu7akEQGSCE1J+7TzLgkAOeszLhG3YroxuZ9JWw@mail.gmail.com> <F1E6C050-2592-444C-BBFF-2BD1149D3E48@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <F1E6C050-2592-444C-BBFF-2BD1149D3E48@gmail.com>
From: Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:29:14 -0400
Message-ID: <CAEz6PPQ1un2i4U3-AYPRS+EEaiRk+N0d-3L5A9U7Kvmg2ti=DQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Cc: idr@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d1b2990584877208"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/idr/ngmBbLG4-itu92rS6Q5ndS7BtuM>
Subject: Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04.txt
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/idr/>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 14:29:29 -0000
Hi Mahesh, On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:48 PM Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Xufeng, > > On Mar 19, 2019, at 6:31 AM, Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Mahesh, > > Thanks for the update. > > I'd like to comment on the new changes at a high level: > > 1) rib extension > > This paradigm is inconsistent with other protocol models like ospf and > isis, where the protocol specific routes are kept under the protocol > instance tree, not under the /rt:routing/rt:ribs. Based on RFC8349, the > /rt:routing/rt:ribs tree is used to model the routes per routing instance, > which is better mapped to the Route Manager (whose name varies depending on > the implementations). > > > While that might be true, routes in the BGP model currently are maintained > at the per-address family level. > It is fine that routes are maintained at per-address family level, which is also done by other routing protocols. The question is how the tree hierarchy is structured. OSPF model has the following: module: ietf-routing +--rw routing | +--rw control-plane-protocols | | +--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name] | | +--rw ospf:ospf | | +--ro ospf:protected-routes {fast-reroute}? | | | +--ro ospf:af-stats* [af prefix alternate] | | | +--ro ospf:af iana-rt-types:address-family | | +--ro ospf:unprotected-routes {fast-reroute}? | | | +--ro ospf:af-stats* [af prefix] | | | +--ro ospf:af iana-rt-types:address-family | | +--ro ospf:local-rib | | | +--ro ospf:route* [prefix] | | | +--ro ospf:prefix inet:ip-prefix | | | +--ro ospf:next-hops | | +--ro ospf:statistics | | +--ro ospf:database | | | +--ro ospf:as-scope-lsa-type* [lsa-type] ISIS model has the following: module: ietf-routing +--rw routing | +--rw control-plane-protocols | | +--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name] | | +--rw isis:isis | | +--rw isis:interfaces | | | +--rw isis:interface* [name] | | | +--rw isis:name if:interface-ref | | +--ro isis:database | | | +--ro isis:level-db* [level] | | | +--ro isis:level level-number | | | +--ro isis:lsp* [lsp-id] | | | +--ro isis:decoded-completed? boolean | | | +--ro isis:raw-data? yang:hex-string | | | +--ro isis:lsp-id lsp-id | | +--ro isis:local-rib | | | +--ro isis:route* [prefix] | | | +--ro isis:prefix inet:ip-prefix | | | +--ro isis:next-hops This BGP model uses operational state sub-tree mostly from the OpenConfig model, but OpenConfig does not augment ietf-routing and uses separate global tree. If we keep the OpenConfig sub-tree, it would be better to structure the BGP rip as following: module: ietf-routing +--rw routing | +--rw control-plane-protocols | | +--rw control-plane-protocol* [type name] +--rw bgp:bgp +--rw global! +--rw neighbors | +--rw neighbor* [neighbor-address] +--rw peer-groups +--rw peer-group* [peer-group-name] +--ro bgp-rib +--ro attr-sets | +--ro attr-set* [index] | +--ro index uint64 +--ro afi-safis +--ro afi-safi* [afi-safi-name] +--ro afi-safi-name identityref +--ro ipv4-unicast | +--ro loc-rib | | +--ro routes | | +--ro route* [prefix origin path-id] +--ro ipv6-unicast | +--ro loc-rib | | +--ro routes | | +--ro route* [prefix origin path-id] +--ro ipv4-srte-policy | +--ro loc-rib | | +--ro routes | +--ro neighbors | +--ro neighbor* [neighbor-address] +--ro ipv6-srte-policy +--ro loc-rib | +--ro routes Thanks, - Xufeng > 2) module ietf-bgp is missing > > Is it intentional to remove the main module ietf-bgp? The description says > that bgp model augments the ietf-routing, but there is no such an augment > statement in the draft. I assume that the augment statement is in the main > module ietf-bgp. > > > That was indeed a cut-and-paste error. The next version of the draft will > have the ietf-bgp module. > > Thanks. > > > Thanks, > - Xufeng > > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 1:20 PM Mahesh Jethanandani < > mjethanandani@gmail.com> wrote: > >> This update of the draft adds support for: >> >> - augmentation of the Routing Management Model. >> - augmentation of the routing policy model >> - support for RIB >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> > On Feb 26, 2019, at 10:16 AM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >> > >> > >> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> > This draft is a work item of the Inter-Domain Routing WG of the IETF. >> > >> > Title : BGP YANG Model for Service Provider Networks >> > Authors : Keyur Patel >> > Mahesh Jethanandani >> > Susan Hares >> > Filename : draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04.txt >> > Pages : 138 >> > Date : 2019-02-26 >> > >> > Abstract: >> > This document defines a YANG data model for configuring and managing >> > BGP, including protocol, policy, and operational aspects based on >> > data center, carrier and content provider operational requirements. >> > >> > >> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model/ >> > >> > There are also htmlized versions available at: >> > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04 >> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04 >> > >> > A diff from the previous version is available at: >> > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04 >> > >> > >> > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of >> submission >> > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >> > >> > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >> > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Idr mailing list >> > Idr@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr >> >> Mahesh Jethanandani >> mjethanandani@gmail.com >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Idr mailing list >> Idr@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr >> > > Mahesh Jethanandani > mjethanandani@gmail.com > > > >
- [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04.txt internet-drafts
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Dale W. Carder
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Xufeng Liu
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Xufeng Liu
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Rajiv Asati (rajiva)
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… tom petch
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Jeff Tantsura
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Qin Wu
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Susan Hares
- Re: [Idr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-idr-bgp-model-04… Acee Lindem (acee)