Re: [L3sm] draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model feedback

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 09 July 2015 09:02 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7476B1ACE9D for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 02:02:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -13.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.91 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, J_CHICKENPOX_12=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 EFVece1UG5va for <l3sm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 02:02:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-4.cisco.com (aer-iport-4.cisco.com [173.38.203.54]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DF5F1ACE9E for <l3sm@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 02:02:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=10868; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1436432558; x=1437642158; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to; bh=vY5/kYNVUYHo7V+2MgjPTH9va953+jJknDXNvXTtgPo=; b=Anf5dV3Hj4MpF667k6MkyGX2cQMQ8EiSws80pM8vfdtIWRqmew1PtzTP bgkz8BmBqh2axbz7lAdrY8yBwtluFqnaDNe0g2C0dTpTjKT9ILUPyGL1+ 6CjKlO7IskXGx0t4YMPNUat7hPmVqnPYfuEAHJcO58LMC2qH0epItDMuQ M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0C8BAAdOJ5V/xbLJq1bgkWBIWCDILlxhXsCgiQBAQEBAQGBC4QjAQEBAwEjCksGCwsRBAEBChYIAwICCQMCAQIBNAkIBgEMBgIBAYgiCA23T5YxAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEwSLS4QjCgcBVwEGgmKBQwWULIRnhxmBPIQYgm2QJCaCEReBVTwxgQQJF4EnAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,438,1432598400"; d="scan'208,217";a="555395142"
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; 09 Jul 2015 09:02:35 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.87] (ams-bclaise-8916.cisco.com [10.60.67.87]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6992ZS1009170; Thu, 9 Jul 2015 09:02:35 GMT
To: stephane.litkowski@orange.com, "l3sm@ietf.org" <l3sm@ietf.org>
References: <559A62ED.9060001@cisco.com> <24850_1436432245_559E3775_24850_1614_13_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF921669DB9A@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <559E38AB.3090604@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2015 11:02:35 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <24850_1436432245_559E3775_24850_1614_13_9E32478DFA9976438E7A22F69B08FF921669DB9A@OPEXCLILMA4.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------050504060401040009090201"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l3sm/_3KL-ktjlhVbhJJqqJxXhgADST4>
Subject: Re: [L3sm] draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model feedback
X-BeenThere: l3sm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 09 Jul 2015 09:02:40 -0000

Hi Stephane,

> Hi Benoit,
>
> Currently we know that the model maps correctly to a BGP PE-Based VPN, 
> but not sure that it fills any VPN scenario like (CE to CE … ).
>
Yes, I recall that. That makes sense.
>
> When we discussed at the beginning, we agreed to start with this VPN 
> model and then see how it maps to others.
>
We might want to keep this point in our to do list.

Regards, Benoit
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Stephane
>
> *From:*L3sm [mailto:l3sm-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Benoit Claise
> *Sent:* Monday, July 06, 2015 13:14
> *To:* l3sm@ietf.org
> *Subject:* [L3sm] draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model feedback
>
> Dear authors,
>
> Thanks for posting draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model.
> From the abstract, I see:
>
> This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to deliver a
> Layer 3 Provider Provisioned VPN service.  The document is limited to
> the BGP PE-based VPNs as described inRFC4110 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4110>  andRFC4364 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4364>.
>
> I wonder: What is specific to BGP PE-based VPNs in this YANG model?
> From the L3SM charter, "Instead it contains the characteristics of the 
> service, as discussed between the operators and their customers."
> "Do you want a BGP PE-based VPNs", is this a typical question that 
> operators ask to the customers?
>
> Regards, Benoit
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.