Re: [MBONED] MBoned: Re: WG Review: L3VPN Service Model (l3sm)

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Jeff,
> [note I am only subscribed to mboned and may have missed related comments
> elsewhere.]
>
> Toerless,
>
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 08:54:56AM -0800, Toerless Eckert wrote:
>> Any thoughts on this ? Anybody from mboned planning to contribute to
>> this work to ensure that L3VPN multicast would be represented in the
>> data model created ?
> FWIW, I'd ask Benoit for clarification on what he's including in l3vpn.  It
> may be possible that he's targeting *unicast* l3vpn only and had not
> considered multicast l3vpn.
It's not what I'm targeting or not, it's more about the type of 
questions operators ask to their customers when enabling services.
Note that I see multicast services in 
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-l3vpn-service-yang/

Regards, Benoit
> I've copied Benoit for that clarification.
>
> For my part, I consider the two problems to be of completely different
> levels of service complexity and while we probably want to try to leverage
> similar components in the service models as possible, they may not have
> many.
>
> -- Jeff
>
> .
>