Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification
Dean Bogdanovic <ivandean@gmail.com> Wed, 08 February 2017 10:52 UTC
Return-Path: <ivandean@gmail.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 61387129974; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 02:52:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 4PNIMtxTuPRP; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 02:52:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x241.google.com (mail-qk0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::241]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DCA99129451; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 02:52:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x241.google.com with SMTP id e1so17178153qkh.1; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 02:52:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DzRWgq2sQEScj11TM2+7waCoV7b3z4L7HjDqIr3V+HA=; b=rBS8ER+Cn3czHMoSgtUUvxMVcaJpjgzGO88Uw6vv0C7I0jXY7MEt+uVFxsEcqf7o2s uunA2h+LZCikLclkM0U2aV8SZROaQyArspdimyGyyDbjtdK9txyI2hoZ60NenK8zEEK3 pnHov/JlFCoz2L3QWQpQGUZOQ/SCA/cP7sn+k48zLt7/Cara6YUs47jjqkl9KvOa3mXB zu84jvt8R129siaZKCcn6xJmDqLQWqw2lXNaNH/MZ8QlrXzxmY3O57L4rOuQ7o+595VG Ufn7X8cPVozm6Ieta6Tnie1Nn834gfIWNEvzk6JvY7qiIL7FuhOjRksGMwDM+toR1sX6 XkTA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=DzRWgq2sQEScj11TM2+7waCoV7b3z4L7HjDqIr3V+HA=; b=TzWPtUO7kqO3AqqJ9QUzeMhCmJmB34YJPyQjztkC2Ipp2TtwrTx64QEcI6QcvHk3y8 fUlQKUjpgXRIfKCaNzxcstVE2M3wPDOt8DU/Ig3j42g/l5KIuHQGJo3p1ArtUy3AmTrG jGXVh52dI7tsmN3DzVmM7Pz8Mn/nmdyqtS+zaB1c7Wb+yx6qluF3LL7svxVYpkhlGmZv uDSqQhVPnZ5M/zc3STEo+JlnKABOLO7nPStYOjCYZr67B+MpK+ZxUZVwlmIrf3+fuRsn PepOklXvpNZjRY3BNRydhGRiaejndkgRQg/VLeDSx/AEr2MQwNcCQHE7YKZxia6PID/2 vqbA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39njEA010CWgcyqx+y1UTd8OcHe/+/D5n2I8BhyoFhZCEp+I7XsILWfwXWsYQVIOqA==
X-Received: by 10.55.9.15 with SMTP id 15mr18942169qkj.118.1486551164068; Wed, 08 Feb 2017 02:52:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.20.0.138] (50-201-184-131-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.201.184.131]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r131sm5889897qke.14.2017.02.08.02.52.43 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Feb 2017 02:52:43 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
From: Dean Bogdanovic <ivandean@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21A22B3591@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 05:52:44 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4C649209-6F61-435B-A371-69884050F522@gmail.com>
References: <067201d27270$a08cc790$e1a656b0$@olddog.co.uk> <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21A22A3DAE@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <BB2EE1A6-CAC0-49F5-9A0B-548B7A8E02DD@gmail.com> <BBA82579FD347748BEADC4C445EA0F21A22B3591@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com>
To: Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/tjZzQCxp8hCvOD9DYy-FiP7cVpk>
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org, draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification@ietf.org, NetMod WG <netmod@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 08 Feb 2017 10:52:46 -0000
> On Feb 7, 2017, at 8:45 PM, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> wrote: > > Hi Dean, > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dean Bogdanovic [mailto:ivandean@gmail.com] >> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 7:53 PM >> To: Tianran Zhou >> Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk; netmod@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org; >> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on >> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification >> >> >>> On Jan 23, 2017, at 9:32 AM, Tianran Zhou <zhoutianran@huawei.com> wrote: >>> >>> To add more comments: >>> >>> On the L2SM meeting, several people (4 or more) believed the 3 service >> delivery model examples ([I-D.dhjain-bess-bgp-l3vpn-yang], >> [I-D.ietf-bess-l2vpn-yang] and [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-yang]) are actually >> device models. >>> >>> I think both of the two I-Ds >> ([draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification] and >> [draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained]) can check if those YANG models >> are device models or service models. >> >> The idea is that the classification drafts will provide guidelines for the >> authors to do their own classification. As mentioned in my previous email, >> the only people who will be able to do the right classification, are the >> module authors. > > But you list some examples in each category. If those example modules are actually not fit in, I think it will mislead and confuse the readers. Good point. > >> >> Please see I’m using distinction between module and model. Model can consist >> of multiple modules and in models you can get classification ambiguity. >> Modules are much more clear to classify. > > Do you mean usually it's hard to classify the "model"? Because it may contain many "modules" for different use. Yes. Dean > >> Dean >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Tianran >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: OPSAWG [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian >>>> Farrel >>>> Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 12:25 AM >>>> To: netmod@ietf.org >>>> Cc: opsawg@ietf.org; >>>> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification@ietf.org >>>> Subject: [OPSAWG] Question on >>>> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> We've been trying to ensure that >>>> draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained >>>> is consistent with the latest version of >>>> draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model-classification. In discussions with >>>> Tianran a question has come up. >>>> >>>> In section 2 you have a nice definition of Network Service YANG >>>> Modules and this definition maps nicely to our definition of "service >>>> delivery models". >>>> Furthermore, your figure 1 shows Network Service YANG Modules on the >>>> interface between OSS/BSS and the various network services. >>>> >>>> We have further defined "customer service models" at a higher layer still. >>>> That is, on the interface to the customer. This (of course?) assumes >>>> that the OSS/BSS is not customer code :-) >>>> >>>> However, your discussion of Network Service YANG Modules in section >>>> 2.1 seems slightly at odds, although this may be just ambiguity. >>>> >>>> For example, when you say, "Network Service YANG Modules describe the >>>> characteristics of a service, as agreed upon with consumers of that >> service," >>>> this is not the same as, "This model is used in the discussion >>>> between a customer and a service provide to describe the characteristics >> of a service." >>>> That is, the former case could be arrived at after processing based >>>> on the latter case - processing that we have called "service >>>> orchestration" but might (of course) be what leads to the operator poking >> the OSS/BSS. >>>> >>>> This might all be fine and good, but later in the same section you >>>> say "Network Service YANG Modules define service models to be >>>> consumed by external systems. >>>> These modules are commonly designed, developed and deployed by >>>> network infrastructure teams." And there you introduce two terms that >>>> are previously undefined and only server to add ambiguity. Specifically >> "external to what?" >>>> I could make and argument that the OSS is developed and deployed by >>>> network infrastructure teams, ad also that the OSS is external to the >> network itself. >>>> >>>> And, in between these two quoted pieces of text, you have... >>>> >>>> As an example, the Network Service YANG Module defined in >>>> [YANG-Data-Model-for-L3VPN-service-delivery] provides an abstract >>>> model for Layer 3 IP VPN service configuration. >>>> >>>> Per my other email, this reference needs to be fixed. But I struggle >>>> to see the L3SM module as consistent with your figure. It may or may >>>> not be consistent with your text dependent on the interpretation. >>>> >>>> In draft-wu-opsawg-service-model-explained Figure 4 we have tried to >>>> show how we (the authors) think L3SM fits into your classification. >>>> Here we place L3SM further up the layering stack. >>>> >>>> [Apologies for not spotting this sooner. The citation >>>> "YANG-Data-Model-for-L3VPN-service-delivery" includes the term >>>> "service delivery" which I took to imply a different module.] >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Adrian >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OPSAWG mailing list >>>> OPSAWG@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> netmod mailing list >>> netmod@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod >
- [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-model… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netm… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Dean Bogdanovic
- Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netm… Dean Bogdanovic
- Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netm… Dean Bogdanovic
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Carl Moberg (camoberg)
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Tianran Zhou
- Re: [netmod] [OPSAWG] Question on draft-ietf-netm… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Dean Bogdanovic
- Re: [netmod] Question on draft-ietf-netmod-yang-m… Dean Bogdanovic