Re: [Lime] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-04.txt

Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com> Thu, 23 March 2017 14:51 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 70D1E1294CF for <lime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:51:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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_NONE=-0.0001, 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 xdhbogVD9_xY for <lime@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot0-x22b.google.com (mail-ot0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::22b]) (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 DF4321297AB for <lime@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id i1so188915047ota.3 for <lime@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:51:53 -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=olW4CxM6Ql5a9S1rFcXPh87iEVfbnK6Ze6wESwrP3/4=; b=ZMh0JEVE0o9kX3/5DjLy3ygvwEo5ILOfHSl6L0R7A8Qw1o5KSJ5LNMaplFY+DOVfhR 0TkLj+zevVoExpvxVlT3Bm5DTeq+siWzYkrY9nKBZQbxVJO4QG/wkeDaA4Q93So4SSY9 NDsXDXsin8LNeC3jPyMvCU0gO2J/Qg4wlnzBvT0AxvSINOlQuehbL3vlL+PmquJP1bu1 Vg05QbH3oD+W9QvvgAf+nL+uTPiKIk8ec84rPBTifckdQhjIaY6psl9Mnsq8GE3+23BX JpAAWqSc7ZPV4F/U/ZyvKufOrBXfcNBuHGYS/TvIswEYXDM38cqrI9lpmkg2WIFDZAUf oYdg==
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=olW4CxM6Ql5a9S1rFcXPh87iEVfbnK6Ze6wESwrP3/4=; b=OcLmyIJruy703w8PLD5mja5XZxBWReGKBh0KiPLpN4xmr/0RnOb8MyfR/PjxUuwT5C ahsfv6hy8oACYxYPJr6MImosjJeTZkDdbDhNCYpZ+wGfPY0WchhCiLzhdtFViFCMnb7r knEW02FQz5JNldLI5z/slwX1j3pMO5hjlGIBzhW2bbJjABadcbF+B7mHm7T+q8hEbfx6 wn7VKHJvkpf+qbwgbsD7I8Q/iK75PepkIJ/t8ObPrS2YIU1RqH5HcF1c/uj7hQX2eAgu 8p6dvXDlt9X+s0tZss63HRA1QHoIcP2+TBWjQYJ2cUd2FUAxLHk87NSeylrlfHQ/7UsA NH6A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0CbdgHEP6BQ+mV24FAjCdXrhbMwGoDNohpDv3CV3i5f588DRtfm2Zf1zQGjnuXDDPjod0vD+ss10/YwA==
X-Received: by 10.157.1.247 with SMTP id e110mr1426826ote.40.1490280713207; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.21.21 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Mar 2017 07:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <E6BC9BBCBCACC246846FC685F9FF41EA2AD823AF@DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <148791857833.21116.9630765186754444170.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <E6BC9BBCBCACC246846FC685F9FF41EA2AD823AF@DGGEMM506-MBX.china.huawei.com>
From: Greg Mirsky <gregimirsky@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 09:51:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+RyBmUfC_K3Q8NBCq96jhRxFUuEkho+-NL5ALx0LtdOLMWjew@mail.gmail.com>
To: wangzitao <wangzitao@huawei.com>
Cc: "lime@ietf.org" <lime@ietf.org>, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>, "Srihari Raghavan (srihari)" <srihari@cisco.com>, Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>, "Deepak Kumar (dekumar)" <dekumar@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c03b82a86ca8f054b670436
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lime/x_ljuI0fvvNn2TSwj1BqXO6vgVo>
Subject: Re: [Lime] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-04.txt
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, 23 Mar 2017 14:51:57 -0000

Dear Authors, et. al,
please kindly consider my notes to the latest version of the draft:

   - I propose to use the definition proposed in my comments
   to draft-ietf-lime-yang-oam-model to differentiate between proactive and
   on-demand OAM. If we agree that on-demand OAM does not require persistent
   configuration, then for example, ICMP ping should use only RPC, not
   configuration;
   - still not clear role of "level" that can have value from the {-1, 0,
   1} set.Is it to identify horizontal OAM domains? Why only three, could it
   be next-to-next domain?
   - what is "network portion"? Is it "administrative domain"? Please
   clarify in the text.
   - what are use cases for the following Test Point locations:
      - tunnel-location;
      - ip-prefix-location
      - route-dist-location
      - group-ip-address-location
      - as-number-location
      - lsp-id-location
      - system-id-location
      - opaque-tlv-type
   - Why only IEEE-1588v2 format supported? Timestamps applied in control
   plane may be natively in NTP format.
   - I believe there's error in

          leaf timestamp-sec {
            type uint64;
            description
                        "Absolute timestamp in
                        seconds as per IEEE1588v2.";
          }
          leaf timestamp-nanosec {
            type uint32;
            description
                        "Fractional part in
                        nanoseconds as per IEEE1588v2.";
          }

since the truncated IEEE-1588v2 timestamp format is 64 bits long and consists
of a 32-bit seconds field followed by a 32-bit nanoseconds field, and is
the same as the IEEE 1588v1 timestamp format.
Network Time Protocol version 4 64-bit timestamp format RFC 5905. This
format consists of a 32-bit seconds field followed by a 32-bit fractional
seconds field.


   - Connectivity verification in connectionless network and connectionless
   OAM has no meaning.

Regards,
Greg

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 1:45 AM, wangzitao <wangzitao@huawei.com>; wrote:

> Dear WG,
>
> According to the WGLC discussions, we update the Connectionless OAM YANG
> document.
> Thanks AdrIan Farrel, Greg Mirsky and others’ review and comments.
> In this version, we fix some nits, add some descriptions, and address
> issues raised in email discussion.
> More details please see the draft.
>
> Best Regards!
> -Michael
>
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Lime [mailto:lime-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 internet-drafts@ietf.org
> 发送时间: 2017年2月24日 14:43
> 收件人: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> 抄送: lime@ietf.org
> 主题: [Lime] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-04.txt
>
>
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Layer Independent OAM Management in the
> Multi-Layer Environment of the IETF.
>
>         Title           : Generic YANG Data Model for Connectionless
> Operations, Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols
>         Authors         : Deepak Kumar
>                           Michael Wang
>                           Qin Wu
>                           Reshad Rahman
>                           Srihari Raghavan
>         Filename        : draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-04.txt
>         Pages           : 58
>         Date            : 2017-02-23
>
> Abstract:
>    This document presents a base YANG Data model for connectionless
>    Operations Administration, and Maintenance(OAM) protocols.  It
>    provides a technology-independent abstraction of key OAM constructs
>    for connectionless protocols.  The base model presented here can be
>    extended to include technology specific details.  This is leading to
>    uniformity between OAM protocols and support both nested OAM
>    workflows (i.e., performing OAM functions at different or same levels
>    through a unified interface).
>
>
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam/
>
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lime-yang-connectionless-oam-04
>
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lime-yang-
> connectionless-oam-04
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> tools.ietf.org.
>
> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lime mailing list
> Lime@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime
> _______________________________________________
> Lime mailing list
> Lime@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime
>