Re: [netmod] IETF ACL model

[Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]>]

The updated commit here <https://github.com/netmod-wg/acl-model/pull/19/commits/37e4c030180ae052a5fae26ca86813970fc6b4bf> takes care of restoring “type" to "acl-type", fixes some indentation issues, adds a choice for “l3" where either “ipv4" or “ipv6" can be selected, and a similar choice at “l4" that allows either “tcp", “udp" or “icmp" to be selected, and removes changes for “global" attachment point. Will add the last item as a separate commit.

Unless I hear objections, I will roll the pr/18 changes into the master branch in 48 hours.

> On Nov 28, 2017, at 2:17 AM, Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Mahesh Jethanandani <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> An updated version of the model has been posted as part of the PR here
>> <https://github.com/netmod-wg/acl-model/commit/2477cd400cce6d39933c908ad97da27ff759588b>.
>> 
>> The particular change removes any-acl from the model, expands on eth
>> (to ethernet), removes acl- prefix for things like acl-type and
>> acl-name. Please review.
> 
> I think 99% of the changes in this PR look good.  The one
> exception is the typedef that used to be called "acl-type".  I think
> it should still be called "acl-type".  "type" is too broad.  NOTE,
> this is just the typedef; the leaf /access-lists/acl/type should keep
> its name ("type").
> 
> 
> /martin
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>>> On Nov 27, 2017, at 5:17 AM, Kristian Larsson <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Robert Wilton <[e-mail]> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Thinking about this some more. I'm not sure what it means for the "ACL
>>>> Type" to be "any-acl". It seems that the "match any packet" should be
>>>> a
>>>> type of ACE, e.g. perhaps as the last entry of an ACL, rather than a 
>>>> type of ACL.
>>> 
>>> Yes, I agree as so far that any-acl makes no sense as an acl-type. The
>>> way I understood acl-type, and the way that vendors have told me it
>>> will
>>> be used, is to say "this is an IPv4 ACL" and then on an attachment
>>> point
>>> you can specify that only ACLs of acl-type ipv4-acl can be attached to
>>> the interface. That makes perfect sense. I do not see how any-acl can
>>> map into this.
>>> 
>>> I agree that any-acl is logically a type of ACE but we don't have an
>>> ace-type and the exact same information can IMHO already be conveyed
>>> WITHOUT the any-acl type and thus it has no reason to exist. Nor do we
>>> need a feature for it.
>>> 
>>> From what I can tell the any-acl container in the ACE should be used
>>> to
>>> explicitly signify a match on "any". Think of IOS style ipv4 acl:
>>> permit ip any any
>>> 
>>> We have to provide a source and destination so this would be a rather
>>> explicit mapping of that. However, our structure in this YANG model is
>>> just completely different than an IOS command so I don't see why we
>>> should try and mimic IOS in the YANg model.
>>> 
>>> Not specifying a destination IP address means we match on any
>>> destination IP address. The same is true for any other field we can
>>> match on. Not setting a match implies we don't try to match on that
>>> field, thus we allow "any" value. I think the logical continuation of
>>> this is that for an ACE with no matches defined at all, we match any
>>> packet. I think we can update the text to better explain this.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Otherwise if the ACL type is "any-acl" then this only allows two types
>>>> of ACLs to be defined, neither of which seem to be particularly
>>>> useful:
>>>> (1) An ACL that matches all traffic and permits it, i.e. the same as 
>>>> having no ACL at all.
>>>> (2) An ACL that matches all traffic and drops.
>>>> 
>>>> So I think perhaps the answer here is to define neither ACL type 
>>>> "any-acl" nor leaf "any". The presumption could be that any ACE that
>>>> is
>>>> configured to match no fields implicitly matches all packets (because 
>>>> all non specified fields are treated as wildcards), and then applies
>>>> the
>>>> permit/deny rule associated with the ACE. This logic can apply to all 
>>>> ACL types.
>>> 
>>> Yes yes yes :)
>>> 
>>>  Kristian.
>> 
>> Mahesh Jethanandani
>> [e-mail]
>> 

Mahesh Jethanandani
[e-mail]