Re: [L3sm] New Version Notification for draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis-03.txt

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Thu, 28 September 2017 04:57 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EE731344E5 for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:57:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: YES
X-Spam-Score: 15.891
X-Spam-Level: ***************
X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=15.891 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_SBL=20, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=no 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 9wdc50n9MT8W for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:57:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3DE641342DC for <l3sm@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Sep 2017 21:57:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DWK47681; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:56:58 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.74) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 05:56:57 +0100
Received: from NKGEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.1.199]) by NKGEML413-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0235.001; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:56:51 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: David Ball <daviball@cisco.com>, "Jan Lindblad (jlindbla)" <jlindbla@cisco.com>, "l3sm@ietf.org" <l3sm@ietf.org>
CC: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>, Stephane Litkowski <stephane.litkowski@orange.com>, Kenichi Ogaki <ke-oogaki@kddi.com>, "Luis Tomotaki" <luis.tomotaki@verizon.com>, "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Thread-Topic: [L3sm] New Version Notification for draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis-03.txt
Thread-Index: AdMumCuWa59T+cYkRq6miLVNd6knOQBjeIQAAfwCk7A=
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:56:51 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AB8CA7B@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AB358A5@nkgeml513-mbs.china.huawei.com> <2185ebfb-f142-9b8f-a02d-59ffd6453db6@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <2185ebfb-f142-9b8f-a02d-59ffd6453db6@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.136.79.163]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AB8CA7Bnkgeml513mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090202.59CC811B.0038, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.1.199, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 3559a394797ae8daebdfca3b7d662411
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l3sm/1lSLOFCowDZ_myD25seQyi1n3hw>
Subject: Re: [L3sm] New Version Notification for draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis-03.txt
X-BeenThere: l3sm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: L3VPN Service YANG Model discussion group <l3sm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l3sm>, <mailto:l3sm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/l3sm/>
List-Post: <mailto:l3sm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l3sm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l3sm>, <mailto:l3sm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:57:03 -0000

Thanks David, has incorporated in.

-Qin
发件人: L3sm [mailto:l3sm-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 David Ball
发送时间: 2017年9月18日 18:30
收件人: Qin Wu; Jan Lindblad (jlindbla); l3sm@ietf.org
抄送: Benoit Claise (bclaise); Stephane Litkowski; Kenichi Ogaki; Luis Tomotaki; adrian@olddog.co.uk
主题: Re: [L3sm] New Version Notification for draft-wu-l3sm-rfc8049bis-03.txt


I think a clearer way to achieve this (if it is the desired behaviour) is:

leaf address-family { ... }
leaf address {
    when ../address-family;
    mandatory true;
}

This has the same effect as below (either both must be specified, or neither are), but avoids confusing the reader with a choice that only has one option.



    David

On 16/09/2017 04:04, Qin Wu wrote:
Another option could be to introduce an optional choice here with one alternative, with both elements mandatory.

choice automatic-or-specific-address {
  case specific-address {
    leaf address-family {
      mandatory true;
      ...
    }
    leaf address {
      mandatory true;
      ...
    }
  }
  description "By default address allocation happens automatically. Customer may override using these settings.";
}

Either way, they would both be optional, but come and go as one unit.



--

David Ball

<daviball@cisco.com><mailto:daviball@cisco.com>