Re: [Lsr] 答复: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-01.txt

wangyali <> Tue, 28 April 2020 10:09 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F7FE3A1271 for <>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 03:09:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YzcTgTdOZlY8 for <>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 03:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79F6E3A126D for <>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 03:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 96F4159E70CE2A35B229 for <>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:09:33 +0100 (IST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:09:33 +0100
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA) id 15.1.1913.5 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:09:33 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([fe80::fca6:7568:4ee3:c776%31]) with mapi id 14.03.0487.000; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:09:19 +0800
From: wangyali <>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: =?utf-8?B?W0xzcl0g562U5aSNOiAgSS1EIEFjdGlvbjogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1sc3Itb3Nw?= =?utf-8?Q?fv3-extended-lsa-yang-01.txt?=
Thread-Index: AQHWHI89TkiWjTGkZkihdc+oAsFijKiOJIzA
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 10:09:18 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiAgSS1EIEFjdGlvbjogZHJhZnQtaWV0Zi1sc3It?= =?utf-8?q?ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-01=2Etxt?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 10:09:38 -0000

Hi Acee,

Please see inline [Yali]. Thanks.

-----Original Message-----
From: Acee Lindem (acee) [] 
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2020 8:27 PM
To: wangyali <>om>;
Subject: Re: [Lsr] 答复: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-01.txt

Hi Yali, 

On 4/26/20, 10:34 PM, "Lsr on behalf of wangyali" < on behalf of> wrote:

    Dear authors,

    It's valuable work. After reading I have a clarifying question.

    As you defined a Container unknown-tlv and Grouping unknown-sub-tlv in each OSPFv3 Extended LSAs defined in [RFC8362], are these used for extension of new OSPF Extended LSAs and new attributes in each extended LSA, respectively?


[Yali]: Could you give an example to illustrate how to use this model? And please add some words to introduce how to use these unkown-tlv and unknown-sub-tlv Container/Grouping?

    For example, if other attributes associated with Link are extended to E-Router-LSA TLV for access via NETCONF, does it can be directly augmented leaf of the List sub-tlvs in this YANG module? 

    If not, does it need to define a new YANG module used for other Link attributes can be accessed via NETCONF?

Yes. There are many features that utilize the OSPFv3 extended LSA format and these will correspond to new models. For example, OSPFv3 segment routing. 

[Yali]: For example, in RFC8666, the Prefix-SID sub-TLV is a sub-TLV of the Intra-Area Prefix TLV. And in draft [ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-01], you also defined grouping intra-area-prefix-tlv which includes a list sub-tlvs. May question is that could we directly use the ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang model and augment a Prefix-SID sub-TLV leaf in the list sub-tlv and do not need to define a new model? If not, why?

[Yali]: Besides, considering NETCONF and BGP-LS are two parallel solutions for exportation, we suggest separate this draft [draft-wang-lsr-ifit-node-capability-advertisement-00]. One draft specifies IGP Extension for IFIT capability advertisement and others specify IFIT capability exportation via NETCONF and BGP-LS, respectively. Do you agree that?

    Best regards,

    发件人: [] 
    发送时间: 2020年4月25日 3:36
    主题: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-01.txt

    A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
    This draft is a work item of the Link State Routing WG of the IETF.

            Title           : YANG Model for OSPFv3 Extended LSAs
            Authors         : Acee Lindem
                              Sharmila Palani
                              Yingzhen Qu
    	Filename        : draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-01.txt
    	Pages           : 30
    	Date            : 2020-04-24

       This document defines a YANG data model augmenting the IETF OSPF YANG
       model to provide support for OSPFv3 Link State Advertisment (LSA)
       Extensibility as defined in RFC 8362.  OSPFv3 Extended LSAs provide
       extensible TLV-based LSAs for the base LSA types defined in RFC 5340.

    The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:

    There are also htmlized versions available at:

    A diff from the previous version is available at:

    Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at

    Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:

    Lsr mailing list