Re: [netmod] diffserv model questions

"Aseem Choudhary (asechoud)" <asechoud@cisco.com> Wed, 03 June 2015 06:26 UTC

Return-Path: <asechoud@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C13E1B358B for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 23:26:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 ixZS--gC8beH for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 23:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C999C1B3588 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2015 23:26:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3245; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1433312796; x=1434522396; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=98IXewzaZf8F/6mGUDERJ2yXpWJroSTgI4PraBTCXrA=; b=XHR1iQjR3XRRBz/8Du5Yt0HfC9hasKAE2H2kEvbqJyCByqQ9cmrRL1LP Osu2a2UhZX/41IEnr3+/NVCwjW9NN64hZ4qkb/p1K6CPhsGSZBGYXqpmM z5sm6vImUKJspgdMfZyxSwYyNUwigAIFgyw+694xjf0t0gAiRBLMzWkme 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0B3BQDjnG5V/5NdJa1YA4MQVF4GvguCPwqFLUoCgUZMAQEBAQEBgQuEIwEBBAEBATc0Cw4EAQgOAggeKwwLJQIEDgWILQ3aIgEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARcEiz+EdhAHEYQcBZBTgj+EOYZlgS6Dc45Kg1kjg3hvgUaBAQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,545,1427760000"; d="scan'208";a="17041999"
Received: from rcdn-core-11.cisco.com ([173.37.93.147]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 03 Jun 2015 06:26:35 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com [173.36.12.87]) by rcdn-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t536QXZB001756 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Wed, 3 Jun 2015 06:26:34 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x07.cisco.com ([169.254.7.91]) by xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com ([173.36.12.87]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Wed, 3 Jun 2015 01:26:33 -0500
From: "Aseem Choudhary (asechoud)" <asechoud@cisco.com>
To: Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] diffserv model questions
Thread-Index: AQHQncY8Oez9ejavnkimcIsreBO22g==
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 06:26:33 +0000
Message-ID: <D193E99E.D4D2B%asechoud@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D180F96C.D0666%asechoud@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.3.120616
x-originating-ip: [10.24.138.171]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <D8FA316837B8D44DBB0E0A9B321C70A4@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/DjoGMguc8JM9D8o18rTNKEgb2pk>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] diffserv model questions
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 06:26:36 -0000

Hi Juergen,

New draft is posted.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-asechoud-netmod-diffserv-model-02

Let us know of any further comments.

Regards,
Aseem

On 5/19/15, 3:49 PM, "Aseem Choudhary (asechoud)" <asechoud@cisco.com>
wrote:

>
>
>On 5/19/15, 1:39 PM, "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
><j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:57:26PM +0000, Aseem Choudhary (asechoud)
>>wrote:
>>> Hi Juergen,
>>> 
>>> Please find the replies inline.
>>> 
>>> -thanks,
>>> Aseem
>>> 
>>> On 5/18/15, 10:20 AM, "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
>>> <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>> >Hi,
>>> >
>>> >what is the purpose of the feature policy-template-support in
>>> >draft-asechoud-netmod-diffserv-model-01.txt? Can I use the model
>>> >without this feature?
>>> >
>>> >I also note that no implementable object is left in
>>> >ietf-diffserv-policy if I do not support the feature
>>> >policy-template-support. Is this useful?
>>> 
>>> [AC] ietf-diffserv-policy module defines policy as a template. The
>>>other
>>> option is to configure & apply it directly under target as defined in
>>> ietf-diffserv-target module.
>>
>>OK, but why is there a feature since this 'policy' is an extension
>>defined in a separate YANG model?
>
>[AC] OK, I see the point you are making, but there are some changes
>regarding it in next version which will alleviate your concern.
>>
>>> >Is it a bug or a feature to support inline classifier definitions? Is
>>> >it correct that actions are always 'inline' so to say? Is this a bug
>>> >or a feature?
>>> 
>>> [AC] Classifier can be defined inline or can be defined as a separate
>>> template and referred in the policy definition.
>>
>>Yes, but is this a bug or a feature? From an implementation
>>perspective, this sounds like extra cost. So what is the benefit of
>>having both options?
>
>[AC] There are pros and cons of defining either way: When defined as a
>separate template, it becomes reusable objects. Any change in the object
>updates the referencing objects too.
>     While when defined inline, it is local change only. Any modification
>has to be done on every instance.
>    There are use-cases where users may use template and others where they
>define inline. There are vendors which support either/or/both. Also,
>Inline is defined as a feature.
>
>>
>>> All the actions are defined inline. This is the most common use-case.
>>
>>Hm. Why are classifiers and actions treated differently? Perhaps some
>>discussion of the design decisions somewhere in the document would be
>>useful.
>
>[AC]  Actions are typically not reusable objects. Like metering rate or
>RED thresholds are specific values vs classification of voice, video or
>data.
>      I will take this point of adding to the document.
>>
>>/js
>>
>>-- 
>>Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
>>Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
>>Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>
>
>_______________________________________________
>netmod mailing list
>netmod@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod