Re: [netmod] YANG model for netowrk configuration of a device's management interface

Vladimir Vassilev <vladimir@transpacket.com> Wed, 01 November 2017 13:58 UTC

Return-Path: <vladimir@transpacket.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB4AC13F46E for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 06:58:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 gUr_1GBlZazB for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 06:58:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.transpacket.com (s91205186171.blix.com [91.205.186.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F33AE13F3E6 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 06:58:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.transpacket.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEF0E1405F04; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:58:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.transpacket.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.transpacket.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id 6IQ0VfeqnMEQ; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:58:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.transpacket.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7261405FAB; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:58:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.transpacket.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.transpacket.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id MJomef_SHb4Q; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:58:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.209.122] (s1853520235.blix.com [185.35.202.35]) by mail.transpacket.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 762A81405FA8; Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:58:13 +0100 (CET)
From: Vladimir Vassilev <vladimir@transpacket.com>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>, jan.kundrat@cesnet.cz
References: <ff369765-bc0c-4852-814d-bd32a0d07ba6@cesnet.cz> <20171101.100341.1185105458701011434.mbj@tail-f.com>
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Message-ID: <9e8ff3a9-eed5-72d9-1621-e9a5fca922c6@transpacket.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 14:58:13 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171101.100341.1185105458701011434.mbj@tail-f.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/G3RC7SrLsdZJq6I4WRaod5fpOpc>
Subject: Re: [netmod] YANG model for netowrk configuration of a device's management interface
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 01 Nov 2017 13:58:19 -0000


On 11/01/2017 10:03 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jan Kundrát<jan.kundrat@cesnet.cz>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I'm working on adding NETCONF support for configuring network on a few
>> management interfaces of our product, a random network appliance. I
>> would prefer not to reinvent this particular wheel, so I started
>> searching for existing models. I was surprised that it seems that all
>> vendors essentially go creative and appear to hack together something
>> proprietary.
>>
>> Our product has a pretty modern Linux system inside. It has three
>> network interfaces -- two gigabit RJ-45 ethernets, and one SFP
>> port. My goal is to offer an intuitive way of assigning static IPv4 or
>> IPv6 addresses, control whether DHCP/SLAAC are enabled, and perhaps
>> configuring one static VLAN on each of them. It would be amazing if I
>> could bridge them together, or if there was a way of configuring, say,
>> OSPF, but that comes secondary to getting basic stuff done.
>>
>> So far, I was able to find the following building blocks:
>>
>> - RFC 7223. Perfect -- I can simply leave out the arbitrary-names and
>> - pre-provisioning features.
>> - RFC 7277, so that I can assign IPv4 and IPv6 addresses by hand. Good.
>> - RFC 8022 for static route definitions.
>>
>> However, I would also like to offer one toggle which enables an IPv4
>> DHCP client on a given interface. This is where stuff starts to get
>> interesting:
>>
>> -https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-liu-dhc-dhcp-yang-model-06  and its
>> - IPv6 brother,
>> -https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-yang-04  . Wow. Why
>> - is the DHCP client configuration done outside of the /if:interfaces
>> - tree?
> So to summarize, it seems that you found published modules for what
> you were looking for, except for DHCP client configuration, for which
> you found one individual draft and one WG draft.  I agree with your
> comment re. /if:interfaces.  Since these documents are developed in
> the DHC WG, I suggest you send your comments to them, and hopefully
> you will be able to contribute to better models!
+1

The design of a ietf-dhcp(v4) and ietf-dhcpv6 modules must have 
"something" in common. I get it that the DHC WG is concentrated on v6 
but v4 is what is a mandatory requirement if there will be any point in 
implementing the ietf model.
>
>
> /martin
>
>
>
>
>> -https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-faq-netmod-cpe-yang-profile-01
>> - refers to the above, so it seems that I'm looking in a right
>> - direction.
>>
>> -https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-device-model-02  looks
>> - nice because it mentions a "dhcp-client" within the /if:interfaces
>> - tree. However, it does not define how that node looks like!
>>
>> At this point I begin to understand why vendors unleash their
>> creativity when it comes to assigning IP addresses to management
>> interfaces of their boxes :(. However, I would prefer to just use
>> whatever is most common here, and focus on the application-specific
>> YANG model. Is there something that I can use as-is? I would hate to
>> implement 1000th version of this task...
>>
>> With kind regards,
>> Jan
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> netmod mailing list
>> netmod@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
>>
> _______________________________________________
> netmod mailing list
> netmod@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod