IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lsr] A new version of I-D, draft-liu-lsr-isis-ifit-node-capability-02

Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> Wed, 01 April 2020 02:53 UTC

Return-Path: <zhoutianran@huawei.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 5227E3A060A for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 19:53:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 XoN4r9OLm3Op for <lsr@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 19:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31D653A05E2 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 19:53:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml733-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 6965DBEE8124CEF48F69 for <lsr@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 03:53:25 +0100 (IST)
Received: from nkgeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.158) by lhreml733-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 03:53:24 +0100
Received: from nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.157) by nkgeml704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.98.57.158) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 10:53:22 +0800
Received: from nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.157]) by nkgeml707-chm.china.huawei.com ([10.98.57.157]) with mapi id 15.01.1713.004; Wed, 1 Apr 2020 10:53:22 +0800
From: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
To: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>
CC: wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>, "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>, "lsr@ietf.org" <lsr@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Lsr] A new version of I-D, draft-liu-lsr-isis-ifit-node-capability-02
Thread-Index: AQHWB0ueOMnccFTtAUS3rcuDfuM1+qhjcpcQ//+LFgCAAJCvMA==
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2020 02:53:22 +0000
Message-ID: <2189e17f36764960bf2dcc554cde9ce0@huawei.com>
References: <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F404DB1AD4@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <MW3PR11MB4619361A2CA3A402A44914E5C1FE0@MW3PR11MB4619.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F404DB2336@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <68249E56-5702-4C15-9748-439E43F3EB0E@chopps.org> <1520992FC97B944A9979C2FC1D7DB0F404DEFC14@dggeml524-mbx.china.huawei.com> <A937FECB-2013-403E-89B2-47971514F6CF@chopps.org> <80a8f83c76d447dda48280495b3a80a7@huawei.com> <6F0E8437-5D82-4FAC-A061-69E56E1E161D@chopps.org>
In-Reply-To: <6F0E8437-5D82-4FAC-A061-69E56E1E161D@chopps.org>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.108.203.216]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lsr/yIrf1l9XupfOmIMgE0YWgXXkMhM>
Subject: Re: [Lsr] A new version of I-D, draft-liu-lsr-isis-ifit-node-capability-02
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, 01 Apr 2020 02:53:38 -0000

Hi Chris, 
Thanks for your quick reply, and please see inline.

Cheers,
Tianran

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Hopps [mailto:chopps@chopps.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 10:00 AM
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
Cc: Christian Hopps <chopps@chopps.org>; wangyali <wangyali11@huawei.com>; Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <ginsberg@cisco.com>; lsr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Lsr] A new version of I-D, draft-liu-lsr-isis-ifit-node-capability-02



> On Mar 31, 2020, at 9:28 PM, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> ZTR> Let's not boil the ocean to compare NETCONF/YANG or routing protocol, which is better. But I did not see the modification to routing protocol with some TLVs is a heavy work, or more complex than NETCONF/YANG.  I see both are available and useful.

I'm not sure what you mean by boiling the ocean. I'm saying that YANG is built and intended for querying capabilities and configuring routers. Why isn't that where you are looking first for configuring your monitoring application?

ZTR> I know NETCONF can do both query and configuration. And I know resent YANG-Push improvements to reduce the polling.  But routing protocol solutions are also widely used for this. There are already many RFCs and implementation practices. We considered both ways, and aimed for different scenarios.

You don't see the major difference between writing a YANG model vs modifying all of the standard IETF routing protocols?

ZTR> I know many differences between NETCONF and routing protocol. There are many details on both interfaces, implementations, scenarios when comparing them. That's what I mean boil the ocean.
Here I do not know what's the "major difference" you mean?   

Thanks,
Chris.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email