Re: [netmod] Key collision between configured and ephemeral list entries

tom petch <> Wed, 29 May 2019 08:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA106120144; Wed, 29 May 2019 01:42:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.257
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.257 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RATWARE_MS_HASH=2.148, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pficEWKyNgVE; Wed, 29 May 2019 01:42:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 859B8120100; Wed, 29 May 2019 01:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector1-btconnect-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=e/vb6byYj6Dfz23XTCrsiU6FokSAGNhRZYdk18oscl4=; b=axwPNMl4nAwwcZJFQmF4FKodwNdkbXY+rWirU9AhrUpNq+xl7b4e9JtycWCJJeAOcbKesKjR5jR7wSjIi5zmQIcFrkxUxeTxItiqe3pUrcM8Ep79O8SNq2Pbq3J16nHzC8yBwM2nft1ipo6D7eSpvMhaP3YK0PeZBx77vXyx+IU=
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1943.13; Wed, 29 May 2019 08:42:01 +0000
Received: from ([fe80::7537:44ee:88c1:dd6d]) by ([fe80::7537:44ee:88c1:dd6d%7]) with mapi id 15.20.1943.016; Wed, 29 May 2019 08:42:00 +0000
From: tom petch <>
To: Italo Busi <>, "" <>
CC: "" <>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] Key collision between configured and ephemeral list entries
Thread-Index: AQHVFfphMHsTseJ1T0S+porZBJo1ZA==
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 08:42:00 +0000
Message-ID: <017f01d515f9$d0c662c0$>
References: <91E3A1BD737FDF4FA14118387FF6766B2774D314@lhreml504-mbs>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-clientproxiedby: LO2P265CA0478.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:600:a2::34) To (2603:10a6:802:20::28)
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f39565ee-672e-4bb0-ac9b-08d6e4118419
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:VI1PR07MB4046;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VI1PR07MB4046:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:1728;
x-forefront-prvs: 0052308DC6
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(39860400002)(346002)(396003)(366004)(136003)(376002)(13464003)(199004)(189003)(305945005)(73956011)(81156014)(66946007)(50226002)(1556002)(2501003)(4720700003)(8676002)(8936002)(53546011)(81166006)(386003)(6506007)(81686011)(966005)(478600001)(66446008)(66556008)(14454004)(316002)(26005)(110136005)(66476007)(64756008)(81816011)(102836004)(14496001)(52116002)(68736007)(76176011)(186003)(86362001)(4326008)(71200400001)(71190400001)(99286004)(7736002)(66066001)(2906002)(61296003)(5660300002)(5024004)(44716002)(256004)(84392002)(14444005)(62236002)(6246003)(476003)(486006)(229853002)(446003)(6116002)(53936002)(25786009)(3846002)(6306002)(6436002)(44736005)(6486002)(9686003)(6512007)(74416001)(7726001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:VI1PR07MB4046;; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:0; MX:1;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: RmIQIw1ogOSbTeUEORNQlcVoRibpn2wqfDXNPnvbq6bHzDTSyP2uLpKubk3Jxl+mtREQKkVSXdOJh4i03h7XlEB2TQ1Q2ADlVmSi1rlMKhmTCIPU9sWGLe6KcAL1vv7TeMDwXIWg0uneNbuKjFltz2/Lbn65/6S5gB5RI8b1xjtoP2Nygntu77OarW26CDEPHziBWXIEwj27dAkPTWSve3hqgk1KqgGpDESsH4c3XvWUneQNRdhVlwXCa30hi8ZRIGj0GAMxiK6rfiCj9urATBF7mvfdBQ7FJEkiOzo72cIfyH4wcW9jte/TGyea2cJqEqwwUps/kczrj6M9aPPshDpo53Tzr/CuI8tE/BGLCPxd9a0HxYtNHMc0yQKqo1vZBGGCg8R+wZGRemYO4n1e9kHnP0p9t6dPgg2oRNvGOHg=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f39565ee-672e-4bb0-ac9b-08d6e4118419
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 May 2019 08:42:00.8571 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: cf8853ed-96e5-465b-9185-806bfe185e30
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VI1PR07MB4046
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Key collision between configured and ephemeral list entries
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 08:42:10 -0000


Tom Petch

----- Original Message -----
From: "Italo Busi" <>
To: <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Monday, May 27, 2019 2:16 PM
Subject: [netmod] Key collision between configured and ephemeral list

On Friday within the TEAS WG, we have discussed an issue which seems
generic and therefore agreed to ask for guidelines to the Netmod WG

In the TE YANG model we have defined a tunnel list with a name attribute
used as a key:

     |  +--rw tunnel* [name]
     |  |  +--ro operational-state?                  identityref
     |  |  +--rw name                                string


The issue we are facing is how to avoid name collision between
configured and ephemeral tunnels. In other words, the issue we are
trying to address is how to avoid the client to assign to a configured
tunnel a name which have been already assigned by the server to another
ephemeral tunnel and vice-versa, in particular considering NMDA rules

We believe that the issue is generic and apply to any configured and
ephemeral list entries

Has this issue been already discussed/resolved in Netmod WG?

If not, what is the Netmod WG opinion/suggestion? We are currently
considering the following option:

   Use a special character for ephemeral names - e.g. such names always
are prepended by special character "#"
   Make the special character changeable by configuration - the default
can be "#" and user can change if they desire..


If this is to conform with YANG 1.1, RFC7950, then the constraint is

   Identifiers are used to identify different kinds of YANG items by
   name.  Each identifier starts with an uppercase or lowercase ASCII
   letter or an underscore character, followed by zero or more ASCII
   letters, digits, underscore characters, hyphens, and dots.

No # (hash) anywhere so I suspect that a lot of tooling will fail in an
unpredictable way if it encounters an illegal character in an

Tom Petch

Thanks, Italo

Italo Busi
Principal Optical Transport Network Research Engineer
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Tel : +39 345 4721946
Email :

This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from
HUAWEI, which is intended only for the person or entity whose address is
listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way
(including, but not limited to, total or partial disclosure,
reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended
recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please
notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!

From: Tarek Saad []
Sent: venerdì 24 maggio 2019 23:13
To: Igor Bryskin <>; Rakesh Gandhi
<>; Xufeng <>; Vishnu Pavan
Beeram <>; Italo Busi <>
Subject: Discussion on modelling container TE tunnels in YANG

The team on "to" list met to discuss this subject topic. Notes from
today's discussion (please add if I missed):

Name collision between configured and ephemeral tunnels:
  This is a generic problem in NMDA.
  How to handle collisions between configured and ephemeral (or
auto-created) objects of a list, if the list uses the object (string
based) name as the key?
  Both configured and ephemeral can have the same object name but they
are different objects - how to avoid such collision.
 Proposed solution:
   Option 1:
   Use a special character for ephemeral names - e.g. such names always
are prepended by special character "#"
   Make the special character changeable by configuration - the default
can be "#" and user can change if they desire..
AI (Italo): to send email to netmod group.

Container TE tunnels discussion:
-          Container tunnels are grouping of tunnels between same 2
endpoints to share incoming traffic towards the egress
-          Member tunnels of a container tunnel can be
auto-created/deleted on-demand and controlled by thresholds specified
under the container
-          Some attributes may apply on the container tunnel and
inherited down to member tunnels of the container
-          Q: Should model allow member tunnel to override inherited
attributes from container tunnel?
-          Q: Should all auto-created member tunnels of a container have
the same prefix/suffix - i..e prefix/suffix can be configurable



> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list