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 >
- [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-02.t… internet-drafts
- Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-… t petch
- Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-… t petch
- Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-yang-… Tianran Zhou