Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.txt

Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> Tue, 25 January 2022 09:57 UTC

Return-Path: <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724193A1569 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 01:57:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 Uly-6lYZ23rZ for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 01:57:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5956A3A1563 for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 01:57:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.200]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Jjj1x0N49z67x9D for <ippm@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:57:09 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.221) by fraeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2308.21; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 10:57:30 +0100
Received: from kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.141) by kwepeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.21; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:57:28 +0800
Received: from kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.141]) by kwepeml500004.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.141]) with mapi id 15.01.2308.021; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 17:57:28 +0800
From: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
To: t petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>, ippm <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.txt
Thread-Index: AQHYCONY9YSHCkhotEyNjloKbBeKraxhwwuAgACOtjqABFDcAIAM7ZcQ
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 09:57:28 +0000
Message-ID: <dfbc0495c3d3402f991bf2501d6b71d5@huawei.com>
References: <164212252543.24637.8230414962710718767@ietfa.amsl.com> <61E14995.5000305@btconnect.com> <22444b56b795425c936ac794e53d3075@huawei.com> <61E5601E.8040405@btconnect.com>
In-Reply-To: <61E5601E.8040405@btconnect.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.112.40.195]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/390dIY1qTwztM3tWBGgXi_65pxA>
Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.txt
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 09:57:40 -0000

Hi Tom,
Thanks very much for your detailed review.
I just submitted a new revision to address your comments.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang/
Some replies please see in line.

Best,
Tianran

-----Original Message-----
From: t petch [mailto:ietfa@btconnect.com] 
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2022 8:25 PM
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>; ippm <ippm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.txt

On 14/01/2022 10:30, Tianran Zhou wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> I am sorry. The date is not correct. But the date in the YANG model is correct.
> The major improvement is about the ioam info.
> We collected some requirements and added in.

Indeed; it is completely different.  I don't know what I was looking at:-(

'namespace' confuses me.  In ioam-data, it is 16 bit.  Here it is identity.  How do you map one to the other?

pot-type seems similar; it is an 8-bit field for which you have type and identity.  I think that ioam-data does a bad job of explaining how pot-type are identified.  The text has changed a lot but not in  a coherent manner IMHO and if you are trying to model something incoherent, well, then the model is likely to be incoherent.  (I appreciate that ioam-data is with the RFC Editor so there is hope for it
yet:-)

ZTR> I revised the namespace and pot-type description, introduced the mapping.

I would find it clearer if the five options were listed as such, in a list, with references, probably in the Introduction.

ZTR> Yes. I listed in the introduction.

What is  a timestamp subsecond?  Is it a nanosecond?

/prove/proof/ mostly fixed but not quite all; likewise edge-to-edge

/http:tools/https:datatracker/

/RFC RFC 8532/RFC 8532/
and it needs adding to the I-D References

ZTR> I updated all the above nits. But I forgot to add the ID reference. :P
Will add in the next version. 

/for encapsulate/ to encapsulate/
("for encapsulation" is fine)

YANG module references I find clearer as e.g.
"RFC YYYY: Data Fields for In-situ OAM"
since that is the name for the long term, I-D names are ephemeral

I think that many of the YANG identifiers are prolix e..g.
identity ipv6-protocol
base base-protocol

only needs
identity ipv6
base protocol
IMHO
  Any use of base, protocol, type , action etc is likely to be unnecessary, confusing even; probably most uses of trace too.  You may find that your YANG Doctor makes a few hundred comments along these lines - most do.

Security Considerations is out of date


ZTR> Yes, I revised all the above.

Tom Petch

>
> Best,
> Tianran
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> Sent from WeLink
> 发件人: t petch<ietfa@btconnect.com<mailto:ietfa@btconnect.com>>
> 收件人: ippm<ippm@ietf.org<mailto:ippm@ietf.org>>
> 主题: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.txt
> 时间: 2022-01-14 18:00:43
>
> This looks like 'it has been another six months so it is time to 
> re-submit' I-D.  I note that the YANG module date remains at 2021 
> which seems a useful indicator!
>
> Tom Petch
>
> On 14/01/2022 01:08, 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 IP Performance Measurement WG of the IETF.
>>
>>           Title           : A YANG Data Model for In-Situ OAM
>>           Authors         : Tianran Zhou
>>                             Jim Guichard
>>                             Frank Brockners
>>                             Srihari Raghavan
>>         Filename        : draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.txt
>>         Pages           : 26
>>         Date            : 2022-01-13
>>
>> Abstract:
>>      In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) records
>>      operational and telemetry information in user packets while the
>>      packets traverse a path between two points in the network.  This
>>      document defines a YANG module for the IOAM function.
>>
>>
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang/
>>
>> There is also an htmlized version available at:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02
>>
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02
>>
>>
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at 
>> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ippm mailing list
>> ippm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
>> .
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> ippm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
>