Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-11.txt> (Generic YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols) to Proposed Standard
Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Thu, 30 November 2017 05:18 UTC
Return-Path: <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lime@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lime@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E561128D3E; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 fHGbMvKfJQ_u; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lf0-x230.google.com (mail-lf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AA1C124207; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id f20so6496245lfe.3; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OpraytxtahchJR8ZAxXqVjFWMxl4XkvW7CWMrtt3Vm8=; b=mb6zus4nBddJ1BT+JWxf0eT5z3c7MDV8dpTj7yYHPYIygbjrX1rfq0dr5Kck6QRDa2 96fZ1qWUOCz+Sy2F7MelIPdvxsPKkmrXnvFsJ1lezuLmSSpQLkE/yJ7xH0JQ6mEczR0Y D/Zlt92PAx0VEBvTvDfAl8wRW1D1URUW5FEjbeo428H1MrLtmamDOnBWC8e3VAHu1+U5 YY3e+n1OMiSmbcUfhdvQ2UggRNf2AGuaSok+3cRMwQjbGWLvne7Tbi2/pY27XupTNIt9 M3N5Hd+JAGpY27hADUWgsuWhmoK+/DgZRWnuCvhkrTZxQ+yTOyiFkAJyqbokUBMt4e1j YJDw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OpraytxtahchJR8ZAxXqVjFWMxl4XkvW7CWMrtt3Vm8=; b=CI7bN4+d7e3tM25YwL/VVuNPP/PAHWF7RtLInsBIiW7q/ncTiIqoE7Z+uEPs9L5x36 UBKwxTRhCcvi5rWWjjNyNCKy/Zw/3emlvAdJBylHSESDtZMIDzm/FAjCf/Xahvxi9qhL wSYQahk9nGLIfyvhMcbZswak7WrUcbmWbZN4aVa/wjyxW98HX7zTEZ3uDejWHttqhRZy 66Nx5zr60IoFWFKnb9DZNkU1Vvjoodiv89ncTWOU+UZFvN31AaBe/oDWTmGTot1O2d/D qKnoXzbsWbEjOfpUGiTgT0hREl0MtXFbvDL5Bi9aHfLe2qgagA6GtNBczviRv3msDFWJ STPg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7a3ZNgSKz7ieCmvFjFDK5iseYuFbjHfYm3D9aD8Z7GpDi2mW8t nnHbYVzN47Zow6MBKSjK2xrvTCnyUn+20umncdE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMb1ZbHU8fOSIoRMNHbA6703nU9lQM6B2h+J4L1k8vxG1J344CyDluzyqSHqp3Mat7OVmzD8eP/gPhgc4UCXJ7c=
X-Received: by 10.46.64.6 with SMTP id n6mr2663308lja.129.1512019082352; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:02 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.32.136 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:01 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMdAHv-iiZ5ScQCj1OZZs6C3FZFaRZbiXbm6--ktN3KZz7b4Ag@mail.gmail.com>
References: <150772925005.24695.3851410645764765123.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+RyBmVq9MnC97LuVRzhYiR+_dj0gQ2YRSp+b-223fjQXvhR_w@mail.gmail.com> <CA+RyBmXfB2fPn8GzaWYKwUJZhLwnKc_raO9ELf+8ANnAcED-vA@mail.gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AC0F246@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CA+RyBmXhhxcrrhfB+ZT9A813_M35U4zuirWpt6YhM5rwGN09eQ@mail.gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AC15C2E@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CA+RyBmV9vN-pzUjBNmDhYL7=E52w3NNDGk5OWGNnn1g1wrkrjA@mail.gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA9AC173CC@nkgeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com> <CA+RyBmXsE6WHEWBb4ReYN3O6ztNTFZ4nG-YOBvxjQvckxc=XHQ@mail.gmail.com> <499e8dc0-fcac-a3a9-e3ae-630691b70bc4@gmail.com> <0888e2d6-f39f-1683-b174-5e3d19df1eae@cisco.com> <3b6c5ab3-ff5e-1d1a-313c-2dd7bdd0919d@gmail.com> <646B9160-2BBF-4546-9163-D6504A47C7D7@cisco.com> <1b527039-bf80-ead5-e341-c8cfeb24f855@gmail.com> <CAMdAHv-iiZ5ScQCj1OZZs6C3FZFaRZbiXbm6--ktN3KZz7b4Ag@mail.gmail.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:18:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXLHmkQgU8eJKUabYRcpkYobDbU6D7DR++yw8X6UwGxcA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tissa Senevirathne <tsenevir@gmail.com>
Cc: "huubatwork@gmail.com" <huubatwork@gmail.com>, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, "Ronald P. Bonica" <rbonica@juniper.net>, "lime-chairs@ietf.org" <lime-chairs@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>, "lime@ietf.org" <lime@ietf.org>, Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>, "draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c1a5e704c1daa055f2c60d8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lime/FQ7x0MZQ0W0k-iVuNAlBjJPHk2A>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 05:50:20 -0800
Subject: Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-11.txt> (Generic YANG Data Model for Connectionless Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: lime@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Layer Independent OAM Management in Multi-Layer Environment \(LIME\) discussion list." <lime.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lime>, <mailto:lime-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lime/>
List-Post: <mailto:lime@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lime-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime>, <mailto:lime-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 05:18:07 -0000
Hi Tissa, thank you for your kind words, much appreciated. Wish you all success in your endeavors and hope you'll find opportunity to return to IETF work sooner than later. Best regards, Greg On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Tissa Senevirathne <tsenevir@gmail.com> wrote: > I have been out of IETF for a while but still receives LIME WG emails. > > As the original author of the connectionless draft I deliberately avoided > making any comments as I do not have adequate time to do a good job. > > However, I have been reading, with great respect, the comments Greg Mirsky > was making to make these drafts better both technically and editorially. I > want to extend a well deserved thank you to Greg. Thank You Greg. > > Also I do not agree with Carlos comments on Hubbs observations, i.e. Oh > Draft is in IETF editors queue and it is too late. May be time to pull it > out from the queue or create errata if the changes are significant enough. > > If either of these happens I do like to suggest two things > > 1. Appoint an editor who can shepherd edits and presentation aspects of > the draft > 2. Provide adequate time and be transparent to share with the WG on what > is agreed or appoint a technical panel > > > > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:39 PM, Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hello Carlos, >> >> Thank you for the additional information. >> >> As I mentioned I already looked at version 18 because that was mentioned >> in Gregs response. >> >> I have understood that this draft was discussed in Singapore. >> Unfortunately the agreed resolution was not reported on the list. >> That is why I missed (part of) the discussion. >> >> I will have no further comments. >> >> Best regards, Huub. >> >> ----------- >> >> Additionally, please see https://www.ietf.org/rfcdi >> ff?url1=draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-17&url2= >> draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-18, which shows the changes >> relevant to that specific comment. >> >> I believe the authors are using text suggested by Greg. >> >> Like Benoit said, the document is approved and in the RFC Editor queue: >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lime/qyhKwFkE4VB9HA0S04tOWPDFK9Q >> >> Best, >> >> — >> Carlos Pignataro, carlos@cisco.com >> >> *“Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make >> myself sound more photosynthesis."* >> >> On Nov 28, 2017, at 5:21 AM, Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hello Benoit, >> >> You reply: >> >> For your information, the document is now in the RFC editor queue, ready >> to be published. >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam/ >> >> I had not seen any response from the authors to the email from Greg >> (I checked the archive) so I assumed that the issue was still being >> discussed. >> Other on-line comments were addressed by the authors. >> >> I also checked for updates to version 18, but did not find any, so I >> don't know how the issue has been resolved. >> >> So now I have to wait until the RFC is published. >> >> Regards, Huub. >> >> ========= >> >> Hello Greg, >> >> I agree with you that the current (version 18) text in section 3.3 is >> very confusing. >> >> Authors: >> >> If I look at the definition of TP in section 2.2 I think a TP is similar >> to a maintenance point as defined for Ethernet. Am I correct? >> >> I don't understand why there are TPs with no neighboring TPs, >> where will their initiated OAM test be sent? Or where are OAM >> tests they react to initiated? >> >> It is IMHO also possible that there are TPs with a neighboring >> TP before AND a neighboring TP after the current TP. >> >> Please explain. >> >> Regards, Huub. >> >> --------- >> >> Dear All, >> I was under impression that that question of oam-neighboring-tps has >> been discussed and since authors couldn't produce technical rationale for >> this object we've agreed that it will be removed altogether from the grouping >> connectionless-oam-tps. But authors just changed name from level to >> position but had missed to synchronize descriptions in the model and in >> section 3.3. The later still refers to vertical layers: >> >> "List of related neighboring test points in adjacent >> layers up and down the stack for the same interface >> that are related to the current test point."; >> >> while the model insists that it is peering relationship: >> >> description >> "The relative position >> of neighboring test point >> corresponding to the current >> test point. Level 0 indicates no neighboring >> test points placed before or after the current >> >> test point in the same layer.-1 means there is >> a neighboring test point placed before the current >> test point in the same layer and +1 means there is >> a neighboring test point placed after the current >> test point in same layer."; >> >> So, what is it? Perhaps it is time to remove list oam-neighboring-tps >> altogether also because having it s fixed size list is plain wrong. (Sorry >> for being so blunt but I commented too many times on the same to no avail >> from the authors). >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> >> -- >> ================================================================ >> Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else... >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lime mailing list >> Lime@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime >> >> >
- [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectio… The IESG
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Vengada Prasad Govindan (venggovi)
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Qin Wu
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Qin Wu
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Qin Wu
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Qin Wu
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Benoit Claise
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Huub van Helvoort
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Tissa Senevirathne
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Tissa Senevirathne
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Greg Mirsky
- Re: [Lime] Last Call: <draft-ietf-lime-yang-conne… Qin Wu