[netmod] Progress of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification and draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Thu, 30 March 2017 18:55 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 7915E1201FA; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.62
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.62 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] 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 kqBUuJgND5qH; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:55:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C0C2126B72; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 11:55:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v2UItp2e030653; Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:55:51 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dhcp-8535.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.133.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v2UItnCp030630 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:55:50 +0100
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: netmod@ietf.org, opsawg@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 19:55:51 +0100
Message-ID: <042d01d2a987$414844a0$c3d8cde0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdKphlqOZxnzPxBmRdajq9pU3vTa7Q==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1679-8.1.0.1062-22976.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--3.130-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--3.130-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: ZeZXEHjiKRlS/isIEXGDv7u9iqQJLR0vh8Ytn75ClDNVCJR4LoJu4rC/ tyr/qneUptiFgxvHaW9GXdPR9R77GDhkyYEbqgcm+cKX6yCQ13uz5LIh2+IOfNoVfIzJhiw0nKQ gYq4pRtmFu+YpukiIJh9l1zPMOb+6TX7PJ/OU3vL+xOhjarOnHt0H8LFZNFG7CKFCmhdu5cXrdo rMz3unsoBZ360Bo2Fs0TbVdHbBlre03CpH8K7VIKRIZlQ8ceOTRUa/cBCi+N9LgVu0TC67A0ob6 bMXcgBXJNOtXGWfATeRzy9lhw/CZKG6tVpjWHJfjF1XCR4TdrdTI6qsXPa6iJ6oP1a0mRIj
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/JT1TgQeuvLHLRgXzViZRs0-SYqg>
Subject: [netmod] Progress of draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification and draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained
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: Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:55:57 -0000

Hi,

As just stated at the mic in the OPS Area meeting, I met with Dean Bogdanovic
today to discuss the overlap/underlap between these two drafts.

1. We went through the text changes to
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification and I am happy that changes in the
-05 revision address the questions I have been asking. I do see two nits:
a. draft-ietf-l3sm-l3vpn-service-model is now RFC 8049
b. The paragraph that references that document is perfect and correct, but may
be slightly out of place as its current position suggests that it is a "Network
Service model" where I think that Dean and I have agreed that it is actually one
level higher (a business service model in his language) and so basically out of
scope of this document.
I would suggest moving this paragraph to be the last paragraph in Section 2.1.

2. draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained
We will revise this document to align a little more closely with the language in
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification and (more important) to not re-state
(even in different language) what is in
draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification.
I believe this will address all open worries in the document that have been
expressed on the list.

Thanks,
Adrian