Re: [Lime] Progress on LIME Connectionless documents

"Srihari Raghavan (srihari)" <srihari@cisco.com> Sun, 24 September 2017 16:55 UTC

Return-Path: <srihari@cisco.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 328FC132D53 for <lime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:55:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.52
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.52 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, 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 Dtwww1x7m6um for <lime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 146BF133032 for <lime@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Sep 2017 09:55:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=11096; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1506272127; x=1507481727; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=CfJwbZ1cfnHRC4XIHWAdO7hLOnlMWeC0kcZtr0F2ARQ=; b=MkM2YubHZqSmuorWpyuX2vmYQ7EJn+48oWUXwWaQHmOscZWF4YqNzgIM PPmvXP3h5XJ5nk510doTN0MhBw08Jdf2xjsxDoDjCl2WjwbUPJZ3cgb+f Vd0oj2QY55DX+vZ91cJ7J7kryWby2+r+pHrbTY7eN3z15D1nwTpZdW44q A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CzAQB/4sdZ/5RdJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBgm9rZG4nB54JgXaIQYgrhUyCBAoYAQyFFgKEJFcBAgEBAQEBAms?= =?us-ascii?q?ohRgBAQEBAwEBbAQHEAIBCBEDAQIoByEGCxQJCAIEAQ0FiU9MAxUQqVaHLg2DW?= =?us-ascii?q?AEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgyuCAoM4gyiCXoFtWIU0HwWKBIgCjl0?= =?us-ascii?q?8AodbiAaEeYIThW+LBIougjiIMwIRGQGBOAFXgQ54FUmEYYI8doZ9gRABAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,433,1500940800"; d="scan'208,217";a="7452321"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Sep 2017 16:55:25 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-018.cisco.com (xch-rtp-018.cisco.com [64.101.220.158]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v8OGtP8Y021018 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 24 Sep 2017 16:55:25 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-008.cisco.com (64.101.220.148) by XCH-RTP-018.cisco.com (64.101.220.158) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:55:24 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-008.cisco.com ([64.101.220.148]) by XCH-RTP-008.cisco.com ([64.101.220.148]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:55:24 -0400
From: "Srihari Raghavan (srihari)" <srihari@cisco.com>
To: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>
CC: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com>, "lime@ietf.org" <lime@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lime] Progress on LIME Connectionless documents
Thread-Index: AQHS8Ez8ImJpKUJGoUiwsaV603B0PaJdCsEAgGUEVICAA1tjgA==
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 16:55:24 +0000
Message-ID: <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>
In-Reply-To: <CA+RyBmW_W1uQeCEeAKPGBN7gfceffNBvSCgfrUD8gPhx9Oeodw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.65.95.75]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D5EDE03A48B09srihariciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lime/lymgWj2o-mcfkV6kcsRK4No-108>
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: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 16:55:29 -0000

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<mailto:lime-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com<mailto:gregimirsky@gmail.com>>
Date: Saturday, 23 September 2017 at 12:39 AM
To: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com<mailto:cpignata@cisco.com>>
Cc: "Benoit Claise (bclaise)" <bclaise@cisco.com<mailto:bclaise@cisco.com>>, "lime@ietf.org<mailto:lime@ietf.org>" <lime@ietf.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto: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-connectionless-oam/shepherdwriteup/
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-methods/shepherdwriteup/

Thanks,

Carlos & Ron.

_______________________________________________
Lime mailing list
Lime@ietf.org<mailto:Lime@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime