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

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Tue, 12 September 2017 13:13 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.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 4C6FF133017 for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 YWj-MOOjGn_X for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C41613292B for <l3sm@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:12:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6960; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1505221978; x=1506431578; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=aQddTpAkppInhfznq8/7WuAgXEUeojOGmdsn2aBevOU=; b=f7i8fvVqZ9he8IutJEZavwHyzkrtGszYuTrayuTFSWgDUr4wa5ekjzTt r/dGWyJLG4JwX8vd4R8suAutoKpHIst75AuJbMBjMPkh9xqPPR3p0PpCL DtQuwPSFAPmROOdFiA03FAy6hl+QGwNoCbNbJXxfruu4J5IZGxgzrk56f 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0DwBABI3LdZ/xbLJq1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgnCCPRQTg3eLFZB4K5BphU2CBAqFPgKFABQBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIU?= =?us-ascii?q?ZAQUOFUISAhALDgoqAgJXBgEMBgIBAYotqgqBI4InJ4sMAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBHYMrg1KCDoJ9hDoFIIMrgmEBBKB0lFKLVYcdjVqHVYE5NiGBDTI?= =?us-ascii?q?hCBwVh2c+NooJAQEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,383,1500940800"; d="scan'208,217";a="657403526"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Sep 2017 13:12:54 +0000
Received: from [10.55.221.36] (ams-bclaise-nitro3.cisco.com [10.55.221.36]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v8CDCpCZ015795; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:12:52 GMT
To: David Ball <daviball@cisco.com>, "Jan Lindblad (jlindbla)" <jlindbla@cisco.com>, Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
Cc: l3sm <l3sm@ietf.org>, adrian <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
References: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AAFC86C@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <b85886fa-7f8f-3e56-a8cb-7d72c4828fba@cisco.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AB0DDDD@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <B5B3032C-A0CB-4BD0-9497-191F2554F723@cisco.com> <a1067e3b-3d3c-e964-70ab-5432663a69f8@cisco.com>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <9e9c1527-08a9-bcef-c463-892bd9ed2f87@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 15:12:52 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a1067e3b-3d3c-e964-70ab-5432663a69f8@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------A7CE2CE2DBE9C20CA3BF22BD"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l3sm/F_xyPCYNFTj2k3WLgma6aWokls4>
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: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 13:13:00 -0000

Dear all,

I was about the click the "IETF LC" call button, but I understand from 
Qin that a new document version will be produced.
I'll then click this button when the next version is posted.

Regards, B.
>
> Completely agree.  In the case in question (address-allocation-type 
> leaves), no value means "IPv4/IPv6 is not enabled for this 
> site-network-access".
>
>
>     David
>
>
> On 12/09/2017 07:54, Jan Lindblad (jlindbla) wrote:
>> Qin, team,
>>
>>>  *
>>>
>>>
>>>     For the address-allocation-type leaves, I saw you removed the
>>>     default (as agreed) but also added 'mandatory true' (which was
>>>     not discussed). Making these leaves mandatory does not address
>>>     the problem - if anything, it makes it worse.  (Issue 15 from
>>>     draft-02)
>>>
>>> [Qin]: Fine to me, it looks we need to seek balance between making 
>>> all parameters mandatory and making all parameters optional. I hope 
>>> Jan will be happy with these changes.
>>
>> Sometimes mandatory true is needed to make a sane model, but 
>> mandatory elements also tend to make a model clunky, examples large 
>> etc. So I generally like optional elements. The problem with optional 
>> elements is people tend to forget that it may not be obvious what a 
>> system is supposed to do when there is no value specified. Adding a 
>> default or text in the description is therefore important. At the end 
>> of the day, we're writing a contract. For interoperability to happen, 
>> there must be no holes in the contract that are open to (differing) 
>> interpretation.
>>
>> So sure, you can have optional elements (this should even be the 
>> normal case), and they don't need to have a default statement. But if 
>> so, *describe* what it means; what the system is supposed to do. No 
>> value is also a value.
>>
>> Best,
>> /jan
>>
>
> -- 
> David Ball
> <daviball@cisco.com>;