Re: [mpls] YANG for MPLS-TP?

Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com> Wed, 15 June 2016 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <huubatwork@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6122B12B040; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:29:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 BfcgoqjyHkLD; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x230.google.com (mail-wm0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::230]) (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 D8E4412B04E; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x230.google.com with SMTP id m124so18314022wme.1; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:29:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from:reply-to :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Gng81WtVICNuOMSuwE/QSYoUAzxexlTZiirzJZE+HM4=; b=WlUiwAhLD5aBnGuh0dzbKPO23WrQfYJAYeWAsQGD3taKYNzvkpeukPJURnQ47UVs47 g7DVB9vDdSpj2Of8LW6+ZpFHMInixWb6JmtVFtR2D+yAX5ZERtMsD6kKrIYhvUyFByWI 3hLq9EMBYfAfAsdpjibaEif773JtZDU2YGVgThnwpmuw6oVcpccPS51tsMmw15bfqQgj 3KK/rAOhgnmL6AVdf+357CPXvz2yR/LPSMKiGFImtUJ34e9eU2a8tCeHa0aGzelqJldx 58ufXZnKz7QrXJpA/NWK5qJMcBzZcmM7MLs3y9+37WKDOBYKOM5WJu25ymx4LcQgwi0b cHwA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:disposition-notification-to:date:from :reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Gng81WtVICNuOMSuwE/QSYoUAzxexlTZiirzJZE+HM4=; b=j3W3+Q5t2UbSl2y459GK9a3aOw6eXbnef0DCA/z6urkJKPM6ueva/zJrTKJhgyCLfz 6I/2sXVa2/z/N0VLz6ltUMX5kr8V3OYu4DQ1m89Kk+xl85pu7Reif0AmSw3Ed6m4xGRy GToMzCBoREL/lJY+MUHe8tnLZtLBj5cVRzWeakNlSSIAqA8AHY6fgvWW5HDOBxSE+ccb ZsYdEvrf8BFgdAcIQ8RE5XEucxw8NyvVTAWaTuYk5Cfom7G38hFh9Yqykfy2+nJZCIK6 PGOzNNWvdQ5YGou+HUyCyBflHLrTsqvUdfOxuWNdEd2wy0xj3vAdcTuWTBD3xENF/NB7 7bGw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKrWutU/8mMBVqQkPEM6NHRbgOWneEMLZadck7EscicS5IRJXVPQqfdRUfp2KSqMA==
X-Received: by 10.28.130.12 with SMTP id e12mr9249882wmd.20.1465968560334; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:29:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from McAsterix.local (host2-94-static.28-87-b.business.telecomitalia.it. [87.28.94.2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k62sm1815619wmb.7.2016.06.14.22.29.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 22:29:19 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5760E7B7.7090004@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 07:29:27 +0200
From: Huub van Helvoort <huubatwork@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
References: <HE1PR0301MB226639582EEEE9D50D74E7889D540@HE1PR0301MB2266.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAHOc_FQ1DnYqsB7gjNM88xpRA7jzvXSPhLjMDxDQk5FXFd3f3g@mail.gmail.com> <HE1PR0301MB22662C73415178325FCA61EB9D540@HE1PR0301MB2266.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR0301MB22662C73415178325FCA61EB9D540@HE1PR0301MB2266.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/9z7Ol4VUl_5gV0eEd-yP3otUyVE>
Cc: "draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang@ietf.org>, "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Michael Gorokhovsky <Michael.Gorokhovsky@ecitele.com>
Subject: Re: [mpls] YANG for MPLS-TP?
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: huubatwork@gmail.com
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 05:29:24 -0000

Hello Sasha,

You replied:

> I have looked up all the MPLS WG proceedings from IETF-91 to IETF-95
> inclusive.
>
> I have not found any specific work on MPLS-TP YANG.
>
> Did I miss something?

I did check the lists MPLS and LIME too.
I don't think you missed anything.

Based on the presentation in IETF91 You may have expected that
draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang
and
draft-ietf-mpls-base-yang
would also cover MPLS-TP, but they don't.

So it looks like separate drafts have to be written for MPLS-TP
base and static or MPLS-TP should be added to them.

Are there any other options?

Cheers, Huub.



> *From:*Huub van Helvoort [mailto:huubatwork@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 14, 2016 2:29 PM
> *To:* Alexander Vainshtein <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
> *Cc:* mpls@ietf.org; draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang@ietf.org; Michael
> Gorokhovsky <Michael.Gorokhovsky@ecitele.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [mpls] YANG for MPLS-TP?
>
> Hello Sacha,
>
> In the IETF91 proceedings there is a slideset slides-91-mpls-13.pdf
> which provides details of work on MPLS and MPLS-TP yang models .
>
> Cheers, Huub.
>
> sent from Huawei Nexus
>
> On 14 Jun 2016 12:22 p.m., "Alexander Vainshtein"
> <Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
> <mailto:Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     I wonder what are the WG plans (if any) regarding YANG data models
>     for MPLS-TP.
>
>     While it is obviously true that static MPLS and MPLS-TP are
>     different (neither is the subset of the other), MPLS-TP is today the
>     most important application of static MPLS.
>
>     However, after looking up draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang
>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-static-yang/?include_text=1>
>     I did not find there any mention of MPLS-TP-specific issues.
>
>     One example that comes to mind is co-routed bi-directional and
>     associated bi-directional MPLS-TP LSPs. Other issues include:
>
>     1.MPLS-TP Identifiers (i.e. YANG model for RFC 6370
>     <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6370>). From my POV such a data
>     model is a pre-requisite for all MPLS-TP-related work
>
>     2.MPLS-TP protection mechanisms
>
>     3.MPLS-TP OAM mechanisms. There is an individual draft
>     <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zhang-mpls-tp-yang-oam/?include_text=1>
>     that tries to address these issues, but it looks to me like very
>     much incomplete. E.g.:
>
>     oIt does not even mention RFC 6428 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6428>
>
>     oWhile RFC 6427 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6427> appears in the
>     list of Normative references in this draft, there are no actual
>     references to this document.
>
>     Any inputs in this regard would be highly appreciated.
>
>     Regards, and lots of thanks in advance,
>
>     Sasha
>
>     Office: +972-39266302
>
>     Cell:      +972-549266302
>
>     Email: Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com
>     <mailto:Alexander.Vainshtein@ecitele.com>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     mpls mailing list
>     mpls@ietf.org <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
>


-- 
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...