Re: [mpls] Working Group Adoption Poll on draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg

tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com> Thu, 21 February 2019 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfc@btconnect.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 A365B130F9D; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 04:17:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.247
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.247 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RATWARE_MS_HASH=2.148, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.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 qfuUVBluUo6z; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 04:17:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EUR03-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr30092.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.3.92]) (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 A9E20130F97; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 04:17:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btconnect.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-btconnect-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=VdY9YWRCepiYimTWJgsbVikWRT9Tqq3V+5sc8ghpNCs=; b=dESRYleF19yej0FwDiWrkicxeoL9gyu4Ethyh2SYDGoTj7O5XF4VgfTWFflFexh1qT4GVN7c00td4Hu13ZtM5IhVmaTBp5HKaxhiOPtJQ/VNqWNBXeoJXkEPmuyHtIy2CXkgXxyLM548YP6w/Azycy7AMCTykPcKrYP/hEKuFiA=
Received: from VI1PR07MB4768.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.177.57.155) by VI1PR07MB4910.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (20.177.201.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1643.8; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 12:17:20 +0000
Received: from VI1PR07MB4768.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a8c3:4982:8378:9a45]) by VI1PR07MB4768.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a8c3:4982:8378:9a45%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1643.014; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 12:17:20 +0000
From: tom petch <ietfc@btconnect.com>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
CC: "mpls-chairs@ietf.org" <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>, "draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg@ietf.org" <draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mpls] Working Group Adoption Poll on draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg
Thread-Index: AQHUyQ+ywD+0BDpFC0yeZz/8w8buHA==
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 12:17:20 +0000
Message-ID: <030301d4c9df$2602e180$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
References: <98db7e71-6152-1335-8ca0-b5ae67b8a4b6@pi.nu> <020301d4c90f$748bd300$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <c33a19a1-2578-8182-1d50-fc6fae20ccf9@pi.nu>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-clientproxiedby: LO2P265CA0243.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:8a::15) To VI1PR07MB4768.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:803:76::27)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=ietfc@btconnect.com;
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
x-originating-ip: [86.156.84.54]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 03ddeceb-df91-46cf-1995-08d697f686a9
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600110)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:VI1PR07MB4910;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR07MB4910:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <VI1PR07MB49104F3FBEFE0D3638428EF4A07E0@VI1PR07MB4910.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
x-forefront-prvs: 09555FB1AD
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39860400002)(376002)(396003)(346002)(366004)(136003)(199004)(189003)(51444003)(13464003)(25786009)(44716002)(62236002)(4720700003)(81686011)(76176011)(4326008)(81816011)(256004)(33896004)(966005)(53546011)(44736005)(14496001)(229853002)(106356001)(386003)(6506007)(6436002)(97736004)(316002)(6116002)(81156014)(476003)(54906003)(110136005)(2906002)(8936002)(8676002)(66066001)(6486002)(102836004)(84392002)(5660300002)(52116002)(81166006)(486006)(50226002)(3846002)(6246003)(61296003)(99286004)(26005)(2501003)(446003)(14454004)(478600001)(9686003)(6512007)(86362001)(53936002)(68736007)(7736002)(86152003)(105586002)(71200400001)(71190400001)(6306002)(186003)(305945005)(1556002)(440344003)(74416001)(7726001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:VI1PR07MB4910; H:VI1PR07MB4768.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:0; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: btconnect.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: =?utf-8?B?MTtWSTFQUjA3TUI0OTEwOzIzOjVMUW10aXM0aWdtZWZlOHF3U0JUaVp1aHJa?= =?utf-8?B?YW4rUFZUcCtyTE5iTEx3UUFMWXYzSU1QVGpUdW1rRmMvVTNFYlBmSVZMck9h?= =?utf-8?B?eWNwSjZUelB3YXpBb3lkTE1zM3hiYTBJdEVJZHZuYW9SS08zR3dDY1lSdXVH?= =?utf-8?B?VHlMN2g3a2tZRDF6SkZ4dVlPcFdjak1zb3ZqSzYyMUNVUlByekdFbGN1SlVJ?= =?utf-8?B?K2pJL3lOMENlelNwOFNqSk9QSHlXdUk4RGpHNTdmanhlTU1QV1NqSnFzVnVB?= =?utf-8?B?R0taZDA5emVUTjE5dTJ4TmJwOHBOd0JoTzNFV2F0MElVb2M5VHJnMmdnNkhD?= =?utf-8?B?N01EcDNTTWNDeThwcXR2ZDJwTzRsRFNjemRkdEN0dE1IUU56NWhTQWNvcnpE?= =?utf-8?B?dG44dEsyd2NlYTJObDV2VnljUTFNWUVQOXVjaTNweE1RRU56WEdVNDlURUl5?= =?utf-8?B?a0tpZmg1V2s4L05XRGNIRldTWW9pbXVWbGx0Z3QxRVhZSUpUczVUNHBoZ3pY?= =?utf-8?B?anhycXpVTElKSHYxWDM1UGpERFdjbXRJZ0xVTEI4WmJITnY0REx2bGVEMTIx?= =?utf-8?B?bjRBVE0yQ2RBTXBtYURFYkRRWHljV2ROYjM3WVZDRTc4M0RCamJuaGRjR0Fu?= =?utf-8?B?TCtZa0hSUG1JTGxISWZrRGU0bnllMkpxbmk0MU52TERoSDlkTjc2UGpnWGVu?= =?utf-8?B?UnQyeDcyREp5Wlhha3A5czJROUIvbEdZTnROVURzM3ROWjBBVGQ0QnI4a24r?= =?utf-8?B?bndMQjBBZWxUdytRS1Bram1MMnFsb2pRblQrYWFESkVaN2tManU0QmQwNXN0?= =?utf-8?B?VVQwL1NDb0NuS253dnVXMUhmRkhrUDIzaHphREU4d2RwYWh0N2N2WXJoUWxa?= =?utf-8?B?UUw5UVl3SFVWdEE3Nm0xYTBKa0QvWkk1RXpNZFNvVGUwWVpTSHh1RWpocDlx?= =?utf-8?B?eG0waFVBaDU4N2toWXFPejljbWJDRGp5ZVNOSGI2RkpKSnJPTkorYXhHelpJ?= =?utf-8?B?b1dKUy9RK0tMbHo0MkJ5K0NZV1RrR21PbWsvRnhoM0Y3QlB4VThCSHBabzUy?= =?utf-8?B?eXZ0Z1lHVVViZS9sd2taREx0MnRDeU1ORmpRNHB2LzRqOVcvYktjSW1HWlpT?= =?utf-8?B?WG9zN2JFajhaa0lLcnhsTDkvd1Y0Vmd4QVhaZUpxeFpkTms1bTNMOW1Yek9U?= =?utf-8?B?MmplRCtHdnlQdTFpYzRhYVV2SzNFZUJ6RUZNWEJaQ1IxSzdnSHpsWnVLekVS?= =?utf-8?B?a0ZTaXU3Zk5OWVV1K0ErK0UvMFpWM2xjTTVEUmVYUjN2aTVkR0VEelg0VWpa?= =?utf-8?B?RElCN2hhK1Nsdzh3VDB6aHMyZmIzVHV4Sk8rWjBqbHRJZk9FMlh2dnZHeFlr?= =?utf-8?B?aDhiQXgxNWsxblhiK0VnYmNyU3JRWTF6OTJDZDZWODJ1NnQ4MkJXQjRUVkJD?= =?utf-8?B?aksveWNXcG9Bd1RxYlBUTmRBekI4T2pLZFJFVUl5eldQN2g5ZVhZQyt0Sjk5?= =?utf-8?B?YzB6SmRUcHlNQ3JuZk13WGFsWWdzYk1yWkZhdnJabUdYQy9KOUw0dmZYaUhP?= =?utf-8?B?MDZBdktjM3Q4c1U0WkF0ZHFaeWxqM2xzTWU1cEY0Tnh6VW1lSHpyMEFEU2xC?= =?utf-8?B?K3JhazA1eTRmdXhKcDRTbHdDNjUxR2IrcnZUeGpSRUc3N09vNDlQd21ycExY?= =?utf-8?B?cGNpa3NiK1RtYXBQWjhBTE50Q2hneFFvWnhwR3I5dkY1RW5LUTJHeFp0SUUv?= =?utf-8?B?QnJvSnhJOEFiaFo3RCt0NVFYa0JBL0hORkpML3dkZ3plSkNrbHk0b3hBdlZn?= =?utf-8?B?UVR4Qjl3b3E0c0NoNjRoalpiVVBBVkNITVBFM09STkhzSnJwenRzaXZHZVEv?= =?utf-8?B?cnFkb3ZDQkNxeXM1bGhMcndJWS9DRDU4SVBEUHFYb3diajVYcnVQVUpzSVdL?= =?utf-8?B?UjFKZzB1SytWblc0QkxhL0ZHWDZoS0duZEozelZnSGN3MTFpVStNSnNMMTF1?= =?utf-8?B?eHVFMjBESTJoQ2tzQUtuS004UGVDZVNuNk9jOVpjZUdNN3JyOVUvMFNCZkZ5?= =?utf-8?B?SzVDZTFpSGVwOGZYcW1Jdk1FUURqT01OWVVJL3dGRHN0R0x2MDBhejZuVkpY?= =?utf-8?B?dkZGOENwTHYwZXZXTGM5MHRtbTFCM240UU16N2ZBUEthdFR2WG5HaG05ekxW?= =?utf-8?Q?f6vqCm0Dq5Q6Uoa1zAIs+8mjmQ5RoIzSV8HiSDCzq4=3D?=
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: vMDr+bjq4zeDoaWfauWRJfXh9BGwk23pMKeidzgwz3sjdeecQFTK7kXEMnLJk5cu3lnekvMEvsJhhWAKv6Krh8RJG2ocDt/iMuf3BbQ87kGn6Bl1QTUntOccaIQzSdSSAa3ljhTOyaYMagiyQc2CIMXXZj4yZcyH5qJYv8XJ41LnS87Uyuo2dDAoqh2wy26SYrpe/OirTZRC1HS3+8afDxuJsVZrhWPMAAXq7ZwIRXgxiWsPas3xNtv+srO9UL/p15wA7xxcptdFhegPZeaO4lFkpVIXIETNbs0WVD8TdXDI0+kAkICUFqkwWtUYxbhSPxJmQXOge5R6myTpDNwb0Khs92/wdo+Rucu4kOdS0gmbseKEhRle6jBw9onNZBpevH/QSfIZNJzJ/NBBIEIqfKmaXxklnSqylMmj4Gzbr5U=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <3641681989280B40AF5F0C500CEA7BC3@eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: btconnect.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 03ddeceb-df91-46cf-1995-08d697f686a9
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Feb 2019 12:17:19.2178 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: cf8853ed-96e5-465b-9185-806bfe185e30
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR07MB4910
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/z2nFeLyaUDQZd6np9k97mVOJ9uw>
Subject: Re: [mpls] Working Group Adoption Poll on draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
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: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 12:17:26 -0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "Loa Andersson" <loa@pi.nu>
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2019 12:40 AM

> Tom,
>
> Much as I appreciate your comments, and I agree with the technical
> aspects of them. The references and the inconsistencies should be
> fixed. However, I have a little bit different view of what should
> be done.
>
> It is clear that we need a YANG module for LSP Ping.
>
> It is unlikely that there will be another document.
>
> This document has been very slow developing, the first version is
> from 2015.
>
> I think that we should say that this is "a good enough starting
> point", and that there are thing that need to be fixed before
> publication, e.g the RPCs mentioned by Acee, and the lack of
references
> and the potential inconsistencies pointed out by you.

Which is where we part company.  After three years, and 10 revisions, I
look for more.  In particular, I see too much discrepancy between the
YANG module and RFC8029, although, as I said, the lack of references and
the change of identifiers for FEC classes and the conflation of FEC
classes,  makes comparison difficult for me.

RFC8029 list 16 FEC, this I-D six; Why the elision? What is the mapping?

This I-D uses enumeration and provides a numeric value.  The numeric
value is not present on the wire and so usually is not specified in a
YANG module, except as documentation - here the values specified bear no
relationship to the RFC and so confuse me  (Common practice now is to
use YANG identity rather than enumeration although neither are ideal).

Taking a guess at the mapping, compared to RFC8029,

          case ip-prefix {
lacks prefix length

          case bgp {
 lacks prefix length

          case rsvp {
I struggle with - the I-D only defines a string, the RFC
    IPv4 tunnel end point address
    Tunnel ID
    Extended Tunnel ID
    IPv4 tunnel sender address
    LSP ID

          case vpn {
defines  leaf vrf-name { type uint32;  "Layer3 VPN Name";
            leaf vpn-ip-address type inet:ip-address; "Layer3 VPN IPv4
Prefix";
which lacks prefix length and Route Distinguisher (8 octets)  compared
to the RFC

          case pw
has
   leaf vcid {  type uint32;
while the RFC has
    Sender's PE IPv4 Address
    Remote PE IPv4 Address
    PW ID
    PW Type

          case vpls {
appears to be an (unfortunate) renaming of FEC129 and specifies
         leaf vsi-name { type string; description "VPLS VSI";
where the RFC has AGI AII etc

So we agree that we need the ability to configure the functions of
RFC8029, but this I-D seems somewhat removed from that, too far to
become a WG I-D IMHO.

Tom Petch

>
> To put the working group in control of the draft and make sure that it
> progress well I want to adaopt it as a working group document. The
> only thing I believe is necessary is that the authors acknowledge that
> the issues pointed out needs to be addressed.
>
> /Loa
>
> On 2019-02-20 19:30, tom petch wrote:
> > Not support
> >
> > The YANG module is very weak on references which makes it hard for
me to
> > be sure but there seems to be a mismatch between e.g. FEC classes in
> > RFC8029 and the YANG module.
> >
> > Thus RFC809 has
> >             1          5         LDP IPv4 prefix
> > with a one byte prefix length and four byte prefix.
> >
> > The YANG module has
> >        enum ip-prefix {
> >          value "0";
> >          description "IPv4/IPv6 prefix";
> > and
> >          choice target-fec {
> >            case ip-prefix {
> >              leaf ip-address {
> >                type inet:ip-address;
> >                description "IPv4/IPv6 Prefix";
> > where ip-address has no concept of prefix length how can that be
> > configured?.
> >
> > There are many such instances IMHO; having references in the YANG
module
> > to sections of RFC8029 would make this more apparent.
> >
> > Tom Petch
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Loa Andersson" <loa@pi.nu>
> > To: <mpls@ietf.org>
> > Cc: <mpls-chairs@ietf.org>rg>;
> > <draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg@ietf.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2019 5:35 AM
> >
> >> Working Group,
> >>
> >> This is to start a two week poll on adopting
> >> draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg-10
> >> as a MPLS working group document.
> >>
> >> Please send your comments (support/not support) to the mpls working
> >> group mailing list (mpls@ietf.org). Please give a technical
> >> motivation for your support/not support, especially if you think
that
> >> the document should not be adopted as a working group document.
> >>
> >> We have done an IPR poll for this document. All the co-authors have
> >> responded to the IPR poll that they are unaware of any IPRs that
> > relates
> >> to this draft.
> >>
> >> All, the contributors (with one exception) have responded to the
IPR
> >> poll that they are unaware of any IPRs that relates to this draft.
> >>
> >> The contributor that has not responded has left his former
employment
> >> and is no longer on the MPLS wg mailing list. The wg chairs has
> > decided
> >> to go ahead with the wgap. If there is any concerns about this,
please
> >> speak up in the mailing list.
> >>
> >> There are no IPR disclosures against this document.
> >>
> >> The working group adoption poll ends March 6, 2019.
> >>
> >> /Loa
> >>
> >> mpls wg co-chair
> >> --
> >>
> >>
> >> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
> >> Senior MPLS Expert
> >> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mpls mailing list
> >> mpls@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls
> >
>
> --
>
>
> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@pi.nu
> Senior MPLS Expert
> Bronze Dragon Consulting             phone: +46 739 81 21 64