Re: [Lime] Progress on LIME Connectionless documents

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Tue, 26 September 2017 18:22 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 A57151342EE for <lime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:13 -0700 (PDT)
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 gcyrmcymnzyr for <lime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf0-x22a.google.com (mail-lf0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::22a]) (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 DE75C1342FA for <lime@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id l196so5402499lfl.1 for <lime@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:10 -0700 (PDT)
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=aQZAwi/hY9JLHnYLekHJZBilyFhOn1R4Asw2i3LhbNE=; b=kkdFxH094jEAq4dB4krJAEmqyVuBGilYje2unIgG51L+q3KJ9jfyVFzJc9/Y7VX8Vz veHo3NKC+pIQee57WVwsoARClkkbr1VYv35j2bEyFCiHRmRJVpBkl4KIeIuu5dyDkAqe azkQJVGuu/NGsEG9zXNL30g66hXTtm64K/sEaySa54Acrq9XsxO2EuL8VlRlwEWLg7+J gkk7buDu+Xc1T8cLyRaugxDTVJCNbFG9Imk36F8qXxBFFBjo899EVJ/gr+ddueye3V42 T/C0+f7iRXni0Rs1z6H4jOdO/0IYenDRJUNTvZpely8CKsrLsEBoIg4h30YCOcr2wZXn ND2w==
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=aQZAwi/hY9JLHnYLekHJZBilyFhOn1R4Asw2i3LhbNE=; b=IsjHIN/sYvUSbLmr1SqwvwbgckQ/PvT9jwjJBL2Mohejj9bOl/2Wk+/U04Oct2qfdT mHYwMlX7FDwMWf0z/fzluV2eVgf5DRtnqwxaFd8jDR1WhHxTI3Gnk/q+lxU3aeoumEzx M4RQ6V+zAJDSZXqFOSIn2cWfcVgsJME2iIX4VQnoAhmVVlAPM0Z6mCHjtK50U1YsaDBT FCToo/w02u9XcHOS4KD+N6IRGWx7LNU4MJAb9+IVW9RHsBNcqWCSaON/kHa4hdggCmbx tQ54zwVub3zocCTqGT484MaWn7kP/k8/p0p/H6RecT23bzzFb86UE+CDXkRaRW+4SCwn j1zw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgBp/vI4+QcF+kUlJl/Rzy+KV2PnfGCF9XkoIVtEeGh6cbiJEFj ZDNPp1+kgQpIFjSIyI5KUd/JBKIgfHt5M57WCdo1PQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QC5r88Q8LIzJmn3gBcM8GiOxLYDzdeSt91fUe5SaXjhqejXl7zz1VkTj4pI7Sg0abNYhyAOgltcANy5dfKJ+HU=
X-Received: by 10.46.32.73 with SMTP id g70mr4968034ljg.1.1506450128960; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.46.32.201 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <D5EDE03A.48B09%srihari@cisco.com>
References: <29E5AA02-4CC5-4CA9-A967-A9355EBD9175@cisco.com> <CA+RyBmWbGm9VVt3q5EjZ+k8VweNK6dDeAUkqhhVDhtQZrR-kkw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+RyBmW_W1uQeCEeAKPGBN7gfceffNBvSCgfrUD8gPhx9Oeodw@mail.gmail.com> <D5EDE03A.48B09%srihari@cisco.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:22:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmXuKJNzNnHa0myamud7EHAxYWn12YKfynhXk-Ck9DK4pg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Srihari Raghavan (srihari)" <srihari@cisco.com>
Cc: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>, "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>, "lime@ietf.org" <lime@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1142c008ceffca055a1bc0df"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lime/gv6syvcw5QS6CqP_FRRgeDf6-ag>
Subject: Re: [Lime] Progress on LIME Connectionless documents
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: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 18:22:14 -0000

Hi Shrihari,
thank you fr your prompt response. I'll review the latest version and let
you know if I agree with the changes.
As for "forever" I can suggest the following example from TWAMP Light data
model

         leaf number-of-packets {
           type union {
                type uint32 {
                        range 1..4294967294 {
                                description
                                "The overall number of UDP test packet
                                to be transmitted by the sender for this
                                test session";
                        }
                }
                type enumeration {
                        enum forever {
                                description
                                "Indicates that the test session SHALL
                                be run *forever*.";
                        }
                }
           }
           default 10;
           description
           "This value determines if the TWAMP-Test session is
              bound by number of test packets or not.";
         }

then, if needed, you may check whether number-of-packets equals or not to
"forever", e.g.

         leaf session-timeout {
            when "../number-of-packets != 'forever'" {
                description
                "Test session timeout only valid if the
                test mode is periodic.";
           }
           type uint32;
           units "seconds";
           default 900;
           description
           "The timeout value for the Session-Sender to
           collect outstanding reflected packets.";
         }

or

         leaf measurement-interval {
           when "../number-of-packets = 'forever'" {
                description
                "Valid only when the test to run forever,
                i.e. continuously.";
           }
           type uint32;
           units "seconds";
           default 60;
           description
           "Interval to calculate performance metric when
                 the test mode is 'continuous'.";
            }


Let me know if you have more questions.

Regards,
Greg


On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Srihari Raghavan (srihari) <
srihari@cisco.com>; wrote:

> Hi Greg
>
> The latest draft (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-
> connectionless-oam-methods/) has addressed the first two comments w.r.t
> Abstract and OAM retrieval methods hierarchy.
>
> Regarding the ‘leaf count’, can you please clarify as to what datatype you
> are suggesting for the ‘forever’ mode?
>
> Thanks
> Srihari
>
> From: Lime <lime-bounces@ietf.org>; on behalf of Greg Mirsky <
> gregimirsky@gmail.com>;
> Date: Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 12:39 AM
> To: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>;
> Cc: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>;, "lime@ietf.org"; <
> lime@ietf.org>;
> Subject: Re: [Lime] Progress on LIME Connectionless documents
>
> Dear All,
> I haven't heard from authors of the CL OAM Methods draft response to these
> comments.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>;
> wrote:
>
>> Dear All,
>> below please find my comments to the current version
>> of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods draft:
>>
>>    - Abstract
>>       - "... interactive OAM workflows ( i.e., performing OAM functions
>>       at same levels through a unified interface)." I think that "interactive"
>>       does not accurately characterizes the relationship between domains on the
>>       same network layer. "Interworking" would be more accurate or, at the
>>       minimum, "interacting".
>>    -
>>
>>    OAM Retrieval Methods Hierarchy
>>
>>    - as noted in comments to draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam,
>>       need use case for Test Point of mac-address type;
>>       - src-dst-address is not part of draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam
>>       tp-address grouping. Stale hierarchy?
>>       - fec-type is not listed in tp-address grouping either. Another
>>       stale element?
>>       - tlv-address - same story, stale.
>>    -
>>
>>    OAM Retrieval Methods YANG Module
>>
>>    - leaf count (number of packets that will be sent) has type uint32
>>       and thus cannot support "forever" mode. I believe support of "forever" mode
>>       is important and should be provided;
>>
>> Summarizing, in my opinion the current version of
>> draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods is not ready for
>> publication.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Greg
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <
>> cpignata@cisco.com>; wrote:
>>
>>> Dear WG,
>>>
>>> We will be progressing the LIME Connectionless documents, submitting
>>> them to our AD.
>>>
>>> Please see the respective write-ups at:
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-connec
>>> tionless-oam/shepherdwriteup/
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-connec
>>> tionless-oam-methods/shepherdwriteup/
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Carlos & Ron.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lime mailing list
>>> Lime@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime
>>>
>>>
>>
>