Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-04.txt

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Wed, 30 September 2020 15:16 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lsr@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC4933A0AA9 for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:16:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 header.b=cvc+Yfj1; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=0Xxg2qKS
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 Ic55se01LCiX for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF9913A0A99 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:16:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7316; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1601478969; x=1602688569; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=KhGTvo7qfAprk/HomIeQo6TxpcBPD6xiZMXhfZNlsl0=; b=cvc+Yfj11AK5n8GQiV7q841WBzZHaGu39EfeowBIk4x4mzjaXH1ACw29 cmdtMlFtponiZevS3RHfGvbFok/qdYYhsgm89RNnHAozxG6dE8d+20ILq b965u9S21C/nIAleHhCS52sWmR3VzHpcLZJlHj5qpytd7QhNzkWOb7x+O Q=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AwlDhDRecZtVAQbI3hlOYpZrLlGMj4e+mNxMJ6p?= =?us-ascii?q?chl7NFe7ii+JKnJkHE+PFxlwaTB9fR9/lDjezbuLymUmsFst6Ns3EHJZpLUR?= =?us-ascii?q?JNycAbhBcpD8PND0rnZOXrYCo3EIUnNhdl8ni3PFITFJP4YFvf8Xeu5jkUHB?= =?us-ascii?q?j0KUx+IeGmUoLXht68gua1/ZCbag5UhT27NLV1Khj+rQjYusQMx4V4LaNkwR?= =?us-ascii?q?rSqXwOcONTlm4=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BoHAASoHRf/4kNJK1XCYEJgVGBUCM?= =?us-ascii?q?uB3BZLywKhDODRgONf5h3gS+BJANVCwEBAQ0BARgNCAIEAQGESwIXghsCJTo?= =?us-ascii?q?EDQIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEGBG2FXAyFcgEBAQEDAQEQEREMAQEsCwEPAgEIFQE?= =?us-ascii?q?EAiYCAgIlCxUQAgQBDQUigwQBgksDLgEOqw0CgTmIYXaBMoMBAQEFgTcCDkF?= =?us-ascii?q?Dgj8YghAJgQ4qgnKDaYZTG4IAgREnHIJNPoJcAQECAQEVgRosOoJdM4Itkzm?= =?us-ascii?q?HJZxpCoJniHuRXQMfgw6BKIhWlAmTCoprlSMCBAIEBQIOAQEFgW4GGoFXcBU?= =?us-ascii?q?aISoBgj4JRxcCDY4rF4NOhRSFQnQ3AgYBCQEBAwl8jHoBgRABAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,322,1596499200"; d="scan'208";a="550807985"
Received: from alln-core-4.cisco.com ([173.36.13.137]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 30 Sep 2020 15:16:08 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (xch-rcd-004.cisco.com [173.37.102.14]) by alln-core-4.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 08UFG8Dm002313 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:16:08 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by XCH-RCD-004.cisco.com (173.37.102.14) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 10:16:07 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:16:06 -0400
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-001.cisco.com (173.37.227.246) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 10:16:06 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=QCHc7L75Tg+Vit09bjyUqVCDroQxUjJeHoAdaPN0iuQ6lqDk2jmyUrgAyp28Qi/XmTgoK9ZJXUTdGXogYchp3o6AT23lEmpBAS0gZ/ldBS18L9cfWKE8VORk59fprVp9C1Z7d8z5RltQOs9CxOmcpXkjki/oLtHLVuGWuVEiiYQOAGeVO4/WRkQ3N0fwG3/QYRJ4Fhqadff13XvRjpDbQdayBlo2/8acSEwHYlY4PyVpPrUgWc+ApVhkyb6lUGcI4CcwhqdSau3FSYzKcmsfARZUdiJau6pdi1av1wBs2AVJKWb6kPG965ID1Z9qB8bF6IWvS7Wzwq1uq1OrJyU/Vw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KhGTvo7qfAprk/HomIeQo6TxpcBPD6xiZMXhfZNlsl0=; b=cp9uwzd8052qGI+8ptHTKPNTeXy2/AglG9VYenytfHYC8MVFQx4+rsO004xRsVY9U0y40FffT8zGAp43waOVvxdgvJ5EncKNSUvDZ2VVuy44hxnRJ0quD+NrHuczKS4fb1aWOYLZ+x3ULNUQ/x/neNuiURFISuQrkjSEXdliYjy6iytQI4Ru2puJ4+Gqb8RaFkR92W2oEFFOsiDWof+xuN/OndypFzx83W02j9YYXyrACiswdVQoHzH7rFT0cP9ehrOqgs8tCAOERPFSdOwn7wLcYcFM8xwn07rPviXkHlB2WZibbqozwv7B4Tt6dSRu8tS+Fa6lpJbUZA8r3qAKBQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KhGTvo7qfAprk/HomIeQo6TxpcBPD6xiZMXhfZNlsl0=; b=0Xxg2qKST/bwguyJlnpa/aXPNwkWMHO5AT66nIFOPpnaBmup6GdwCyg4/qGPaKRsphcLAZuYwn7eDHEiE8HMI9LR8ZHYapjUy2xAUhy86BRKT2YJtepuCrzihpgnFlmaKOO0oYIkj57HLDc4BhnBTNWjuF7koMKKTlXULS9ovv8=
Received: from BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:89::27) by BYAPR11MB2885.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:87::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3412.28; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:16:06 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1ddc:cdb4:32cc:f078]) by BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1ddc:cdb4:32cc:f078%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3412.029; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:16:05 +0000
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
CC: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@futurewei.com>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-04.txt
Thread-Index: AQHWcSut5NtSKq9iwkm7KpdB3W6cTak1z3yAgEpeo4CAARRHgIAAEW2A
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:16:05 +0000
Message-ID: <8BEB4C85-D6A6-40BD-B893-FB19A601A6B8@cisco.com>
References: <159729345724.32598.10798369052469436120@ietfa.amsl.com> <AM7PR07MB62480BC77EABB838C031CA20A0430@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <316D1B5E-F709-4598-8998-4F6368569CD1@cisco.com> <AM7PR07MB624874BC3DDB9EF8D0074DB4A0330@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM7PR07MB624874BC3DDB9EF8D0074DB4A0330@AM7PR07MB6248.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.41.20091302
authentication-results: btconnect.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;btconnect.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [136.56.133.70]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8ea3d0ba-3483-4985-a4a0-08d86553c088
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BYAPR11MB2885:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BYAPR11MB28855885315C0DAC5440CDC6C2330@BYAPR11MB2885.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: b4movK5kxDHtzaPvyYR6OdPuUXRy7n7BbUlx4ZHJ7ABgKwjCKxqe8/6r0H0n1I42iPB6b/pOuqeKtfBIUsi7MdBWEG7fk4q/5S6ihqpSnGzybncmZa+TsRu5+Pp/eo/4sYJ6NMJbfU6TBQgBMuKCRZwqsbBSHXkWkSZOHEZMYqTPisTZ8qNbV9whxxqgahwYcD3o/hNWikESHUoY4RKLlL31vVSRzkvuCexbhsGE4+EWCka+dhK2TrsrbXSewVr4x/p+3SJ3OTIl6TABfmKaFHTJp2Ji5ltBDq5z76V19fc7rmN3EV7FlVVv4SR2jvKlGsiLj5KeEWYoutYnaafwD44PU8HrvNB1OHMfc3oXr2vt4FU50DKdfIh4VfNIXR1eqRzP+tpTeI7N5PQYBwJy2ZwMftWz/nbFC7vUqPxe9W6r+ES9nbXg+1nor2fYNh+a
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(346002)(39860400002)(376002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(478600001)(86362001)(36756003)(33656002)(186003)(2616005)(8936002)(53546011)(66946007)(6506007)(4326008)(966005)(76116006)(2906002)(8676002)(66556008)(64756008)(66446008)(6512007)(110136005)(66476007)(296002)(83380400001)(66574015)(26005)(316002)(71200400001)(6486002)(5660300002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <EF86DBE1ADAC5D48B0DF1C5940E1083E@namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8ea3d0ba-3483-4985-a4a0-08d86553c088
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Sep 2020 15:16:05.8817 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: Ntmru1Z7irF+lwV/UFHj2n340sd/zOv5IQPtcLLKTACKplPwDTMrZOP+KeS5MJKw
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR11MB2885
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.14, xch-rcd-004.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-4.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/_j8POEdzChruO8thkePOKs92f2Y>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-04.txt
X-BeenThere: lsr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Link State Routing Working Group <lsr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lsr/>
List-Post: <mailto:lsr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr>, <mailto:lsr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:16:13 -0000

Hi Tom, 

See inline <ACEE2> . I've addressed your comments in 05. 

On 9/30/20, 6:14 AM, "tom petch" <ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:

    From: Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>
    Sent: 29 September 2020 22:44

    Hi Tom,

    We can add the references. See ACEE>.
    <tp>
    Yes please - it will make it easier for me to review

    On 8/13/20, 6:03 AM, "Lsr on behalf of tom petch" <lsr-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of ietfc@btconnect.com> wrote:

        From: Lsr <lsr-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org <internet-drafts@ietf.org>
        Sent: 13 August 2020 05:37

        I said before that it was tough to review because of a lack of references in the YANG module and that remains true.
        You have two Boolean to enable extended LSA on for ospf, one for area.  Yes, the answer is in RFC8362 but it tells me the YANG module is wrong - and it took me some time to find it.  RFC8362 defines two parameters ExtendedLSASupport and AreaExtendedLSASupport and the latter is not in the model; yes you have a Boolean under area but I think its meaning requires a reading of RFC8362 Appendix B and that is missing and the description is unclear and the name is wrong.  Also the RFC has a SHOULD in it which the model does not implement.  You reference s.6.2 but I think that wrong, that it is Appendices A and B that describe this.

    ACEE> What is the SHOULD that isn't implemented?

    <tp>
    The very last sentence of RFC8362 about the interaction of ExtendedLSASupport and AreaExtendedLSASupport; YANG has 'must' not 'should' and I would be inclined to make this a YANG 'must' but it you think that that is too much, then a comment in the description is needed IMHO

        On type, you say there are three possible values. Precisely.  Can you have the type set to 'ospf' and support ospfv3?  If so, your model fails.  Or does ospf-yang only allow the type to be ospfv2 or ospfv3 and bar the use of ospf per se?

<ACEE2> Ok - I've changed this quite a bit by removing the default for the area level and adding the SHOULD as a YANG must. 


    ACEE>"ospf" is the base identity for  "ospfv2" and "ospfv3". So, if a container is applicable to both, no when constraint is needed. However, if it is applicable to the one or the other, a "when" constraint. It is common to do this in YANG. This module is applicable only to OSPFv3.

    <tp>
    Yes, my question is more about the base ospf model about the valid values that can appear in rt:type; is ospf per se a valid value of type or must it be either ospfv2 or ospfv3?

        The reference statement after the description could do with a title as you have for the revision description

        My point about link type is that you are augmenting ospf-yang which uses an enum so in places users will be required to use an enum and in others a uint8 which could be confusing

    ACEE> I don't get this. We don’t augment link-type.

    <tp>
    Yes,  In base ospf.yang  link type is YANG type enum but in this it is type unit8 so modelling the same object with two different data types I think might be confusing.

<ACEE2>I see now. I've used the type ospf:link-type consistent with ietf-ospf.yang. 


Thanks,
Acee

    Tom Petch

    Thanks,
    Acee

        Tom Petch

        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-04.txt
                Pages           : 27
                Date            : 2020-08-12

        Abstract:
           This document defines a YANG data model augmenting the IETF OSPF YANG
           model to provide support for OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (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:
        https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang/

        There are also htmlized versions available at:
        https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-04
        https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-04

        A diff from the previous version is available at:
        https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lsr-ospfv3-extended-lsa-yang-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/


        _______________________________________________
        Lsr mailing list
        Lsr@ietf.org
        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr

        _______________________________________________
        Lsr mailing list
        Lsr@ietf.org
        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr