Re: [netmod] Mail regarding draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model

"Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com> Tue, 05 November 2019 14:50 UTC

Return-Path: <rwilton@cisco.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 6A813120A0D for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 06:50:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.499
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.499 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=gwiExzrm; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=hZpuQvki
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 OhRjXulfL3Kn for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 06:50:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4758120963 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 06:47:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=47478; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1572965220; x=1574174820; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=eBXql8pDWD/orEnAwQljVgJ8DbMlrLUDbEIH8iIhhes=; b=gwiExzrm3VS0Z3SPmauXmF1uE03JsDh1+Exrd2GNgNrCMP9iDmaej2kn Q5iQHytRKX5ihEDQmksdWDkVSGgyiiAGwVaYj19VuQdxXU7j6uY8PbQ7a Ob9HTd6rllmrWPjhFJUl3MIWaNnrCpSLai+tFkF34Ti2vQ3Pab1MWEraB I=;
IronPort-PHdr: =?us-ascii?q?9a23=3AegG8yB2alccZjkERsmDT+zVfbzU7u7jyIg8e44?= =?us-ascii?q?YmjLQLaKm44pD+JxKHt+51ggrPWoPWo7JfhuzavrqoeFRI4I3J8RVgOIdJSw?= =?us-ascii?q?dDjMwXmwI6B8vQE1L6KOLtaQQxHd9JUxlu+HToeUU=3D?=
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0ANAAAKfMFd/4cNJK1dCRkBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBAQEBAREBAQEBAQEBAQEBAYFqBAEBAQEBCwGBGy9QBWxYIAQLKgq?= =?us-ascii?q?EH4NGA4RahiBOghCXfoEugSQDVAkBAQEMAQEtAgEBhEACF4N3JDQJDgIDCwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BBAEBAQIBBQRthTcMhVEBAQEBAxIRChMBATgPAgEIEQMBAQEhAQYDAgICMBQ?= =?us-ascii?q?JCAIEARIIGoMBgXlNAy4BAqR6AoE4iGB1gTKCfgEBBYE4AwtDgnoYghcJgTY?= =?us-ascii?q?BjBIYgUA/gRFGgkw+hBsKAQEgBQcSFoJaMoIsjQ6CcoU8JIIXlgMKgiSMaYN?= =?us-ascii?q?shQKCPC+Wfo5DgUCYHAIEAgQFAg4BAQWBUjmBWHAVgydQERSDBoNzilN0gSi?= =?us-ascii?q?OLYEiAS9eAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.68,271,1569283200"; d="scan'208,217";a="660227292"
Received: from alln-core-2.cisco.com ([173.36.13.135]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 05 Nov 2019 13:43:49 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (xch-rcd-002.cisco.com [173.37.102.12]) by alln-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id xA5Dhm1K030539 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:43:49 GMT
Received: from xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) by XCH-RCD-002.cisco.com (173.37.102.12) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 07:43:48 -0600
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by xhs-rcd-002.cisco.com (173.37.227.247) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 07:43:47 -0600
Received: from NAM02-CY1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 07:43:47 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Tg8M0o7OSlU1RQtDPNqKgqkIgidM0/XpxKH9xuUCtvurkowgq9Dhs8lfrpF68HjDoQ4bdZirpAUUrHdbGw5FzlP9Y3b1VPTmdJ0OGcDmE569bO9RrWOY3a4sQPxzlzumd5o+sA1LJfKzpRhgLx/WuZl33GuwOCzs1MnT45ec818SQZyoali242BCDSeaqXb8MYJzTcrlCv80PZOsSooZKrLVO/d565hYEfS6C5cHcBBCq9c2Ek98ZeVCX10Wz+2yzQ7fUMOqI8Uy3Ackb/wvW1y0tk5ae6CUqnmba42x9Crywnk3Hld2hw908hTzKZy1M5GITSGFe6Lc17ru1SlEFw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=eBXql8pDWD/orEnAwQljVgJ8DbMlrLUDbEIH8iIhhes=; b=GdUMQsGca95ZLmBp+LvJyFg/z/04gpFJzKTR+9SmNFOPQ3g2PUoKHdL6TEjMSMGeMVoGSoepRnUP0tmO+SiWbHC5NrZ/+OcRGZVcaIhdECQOiOfQJKW2stHOwMZYAlihVEfOgQphOhd6DZZQDCxS24B9uugW5zdWP4nri9kuzsTx75oHwLJuVIw60CCWSXbadHH9/1AKa8N6xbaX+fC4URIvsR4wibgZpUUJM3buJrLPXKoH+WtAIm3GyZ2kVXwLoH9VaO1z0Tw68Jp1YAbNZNJPcJOurxzoh8EHPIM9cgPJ84vhWYWUx6Cw9DpJwgMx1cyVVkZMjHG0E/LTWm5qCQ==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=eBXql8pDWD/orEnAwQljVgJ8DbMlrLUDbEIH8iIhhes=; b=hZpuQvkirphHGllwbr12ia/HI5OAARVLYCM7qTCmj4cd4HUPPxDsKScjCwG+beW176SlSlOVoTLWBgnytr7qrP+gSVBlE7nsXwORgdLfPlXh7FjRDGyWYhcls8TkCNrp3IjWcr0Uf2RjGzt0XkoPR76OndO3IDnNFq82aA5Un4w=
Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (52.135.38.209) by MN2PR11MB4191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (10.255.180.159) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2408.24; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:43:46 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::49b6:bc5c:bd3e:203c]) by MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::49b6:bc5c:bd3e:203c%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2408.024; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:43:45 +0000
From: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Stephen Cheng <Stephen.Cheng@Aviatnet.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] Mail regarding draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model
Thread-Index: AQHVk9CfpozA86+PlEyxhUIVYZv2r6d8liCw
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:43:45 +0000
Message-ID: <MN2PR11MB4366A5B42D4855809060E185B57E0@MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <1B6A68BC-1207-4143-BA07-330E774C3CA3@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <1B6A68BC-1207-4143-BA07-330E774C3CA3@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=rwilton@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [173.38.220.45]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 325baa4d-b873-4f1e-a628-08d761f62e1d
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB4191:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB41919CAA3C95BC1D363806F8B57E0@MN2PR11MB4191.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:4941;
x-forefront-prvs: 0212BDE3BE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(396003)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(136003)(366004)(51444003)(199004)(189003)(3846002)(6506007)(5660300002)(9326002)(2501003)(6116002)(790700001)(476003)(26005)(81166006)(229853002)(102836004)(71190400001)(6436002)(8936002)(186003)(81156014)(110136005)(53546011)(71200400001)(8676002)(7736002)(25786009)(54896002)(6306002)(7696005)(99286004)(14454004)(74316002)(66446008)(9686003)(55016002)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(76116006)(66946007)(256004)(14444005)(86362001)(316002)(6246003)(478600001)(33656002)(2906002)(66066001)(76176011)(52536014)(486006)(446003)(11346002)(236005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB4191; H:MN2PR11MB4366.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: gObuxpO0UiomNDkAvrliwvwhMiyYFyga5WwRA2JWPF8JUDcFkGlxKHdIYGuCt5DnSTadixnRs1uR4itJbtjF0uv4uHVWQSAyW8TRCIpXBHqsXehCrYwaOdNfTAuv3j1VSxYN7v5qAvsTMT6eC3JK0AECribwIphy+YftE/0q/irLePVvXDAPO8bQhliTWfD73ji56dukWiE1fcGtkLRUcrBBFO93Attv+ppzzmm0O5itGaPStxt7DgAaIMWnGUZPDfKjyRKoM/6X8UBfApo+BE4U1InBIOHOGZu0EoK81j4xWtmtUDqi5o+OjqEfwaEVpWhmtf3dF5sh6jMLTIgssM6eECkIG/Wpm8zFVs73j1V8DA4VxMKoOv9Rb4Wc3WMcBVnubdhJ8l7sW9BkxBzNmOa/FGI6gXNMG3TLxbZ8GLB29/BInzywmZiMSjC8UWo6
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MN2PR11MB4366A5B42D4855809060E185B57E0MN2PR11MB4366namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 325baa4d-b873-4f1e-a628-08d761f62e1d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Nov 2019 13:43:45.6880 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 4ZeNghdBRyJ8V6d3gxLTlRkcncUlt1ykSMj6b7VRp9519V1j32aLxwy9W8NvkQ7iNQYG6VGqYbXftU15h2zKaQ==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB4191
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.12, xch-rcd-002.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/di5wlguvUsVZT6Vb8bOcfBqKvYA>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Mail regarding draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 14:50:56 -0000

Hi Acee,

No, not yet.  But I have added an issue to track this, so this doesn’t get forgotten.

I think that probably all of the published IEEE standard YANG modules should be added to the search path.

Thanks,
Rob


From: Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com>
Sent: 05 November 2019 12:01
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com>om>; Stephen Cheng <Stephen.Cheng@Aviatnet.com>om>; netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Mail regarding draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model

Hi Rob,

Any update on getting the YANG tools issue resolved with the ieee802-dot1q-types.yang model in the search path?

Thanks,
Acee

From: netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org>> on behalf of "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>>
Date: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 4:50 AM
To: Stephen Cheng <Stephen.Cheng@Aviatnet.com<mailto:Stephen.Cheng@Aviatnet.com>>, "netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>" <netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>>
Subject: Re: [netmod] Mail regarding draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model

Hi Stephen,

I’ve just posted an updated version of this document.

The document is in WGLC, and I’m hoping that I can address any outstanding comments (including yours) over the next couple of weeks.

Kind regards,
Rob


From: netmod <netmod-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Stephen Cheng
Sent: 05 November 2019 02:30
To: netmod@ietf.org<mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: [netmod] Mail regarding draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model


Authors  of draft-ietf-netmod-sub-intf-vlan-model,

I noticed that the draft has expired, is there any intention to publish a new version in new future?

Secondly, I notice a possible problem in the examples in section 7.1/7.2.

In current (expired) draft, in section 7.1. we have in the example

       <interface>
         <name>eth0.1</name>
         <type>ianaift:l2vlan</type>
         <if-cmn:parent-interface>eth0</if-cmn:parent-interface>
         <if-cmn:encapsulation>
           <dot1q-vlan
            xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-if-l3-vlan">
             <outer-tag>
               <tag-type>dot1q-types:s-vlan</tag-type>
               <vlan-id>10</vlan-id>
             </outer-tag>

The type of of eth0.1 interface is defined as a l2vlan.

L2vlan is defined in RFC 7224 as follows, which means that l2vlan does not derive from ethernetCsmacd nor ieee8023adLag nor ethSubInterface:

identity l2vlan {

       base iana-interface-type;

       description

         "Layer 2 Virtual LAN using 802.1Q.";

     }


However in the current (expired) draft, ietf-if-l3-vlan@2019-03-05.yang<mailto:ietf-if-l3-vlan@2019-03-05.yang> says

     /*

      * Add support for the 802.1Q VLAN encapsulation syntax on layer 3

      * terminated VLAN sub-interfaces.

      */

     augment "/if:interfaces/if:interface/if-cmn:encapsulation/" +

             "if-cmn:encaps-type" {

       when

           "derived-from-or-self(../if:type,

                                 'ianaift:ethernetCsmacd') or

            derived-from-or-self(../if:type,

                                 'ianaift:ieee8023adLag') or

            derived-from-or-self(../if:type,

                                 'if-cmn:ethSubInterface')" {

         description

           "Applies only to Ethernet-like interfaces and

            sub-interfaces";

       }



       description

         "Augment the generic interface encapsulation with an

          basic 802.1Q VLAN encapsulation for sub-interfaces.";



       /*

        * Matches a single VLAN Id, or a pair of VLAN Ids to classify

        * traffic into an L3 service.

        */

       case dot1q-vlan {

         container dot1q-vlan {

           must

             'count(../../if-cmn:forwarding-mode) = 0 or ' +

             'derived-from-or-self(../../if-cmn:forwarding-mode,' +

                                   '"if-cmn:layer-3-forwarding")' {

               error-message

                 "If the interface forwarding-mode leaf is set then it

                  must be set to an identity that derives from

                  layer-3-forwarding";



               description

                 "The forwarding-mode leaf on an interface can

                  optionally be used to enforce consistency of

                  configuration";

             }





           description

             "Match VLAN tagged frames with specific VLAN Ids";

           container outer-tag {

             must

               'tag-type = "dot1q-types:s-vlan" or ' +

               'tag-type = "dot1q-types:c-vlan"' {



               error-message

                   "Only C-VLAN and S-VLAN tags can be matched";



               description

               "For IEEE 802.1Q interoperability, only C-VLAN and

                    S-VLAN tags can be matched";

             }



             description

               "Classifies traffic using the outermost VLAN tag on the

                frame.";



             uses dot1q-types:dot1q-tag-classifier-grouping;

           }


As such if the type of eth 0.1 is l2vlan should outer-tag etc be available to this interface, since l2vlan would not satisfy the “when” clause?

I believe there are similar issues for other interfaces too in section 7.1/7.2 examples.

Warm regards,
Stephen Cheng