Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: loopback addresses

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Fri, 31 July 2020 01:23 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 C70923A07CA for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:23:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 JlQj3a_SIqva for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:23:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [185.176.76.210]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD1323A07C4 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:23:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhreml703-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 6DF0BD9D74C2152B0749; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 02:23:42 +0100 (IST)
Received: from lhreml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.52) by lhreml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1913.5; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 02:23:41 +0100
Received: from DGGEML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.17.50) by lhreml703-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.52) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_0, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA_P256) id 15.1.1913.5 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 02:23:41 +0100
Received: from DGGEML511-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.170]) by dggeml406-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.3.17.50]) with mapi id 14.03.0487.000; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:22:43 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
CC: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <cpignata@cisco.com>, "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [netmod] rfc6991bis: loopback addresses
Thread-Index: AdZm1m5FyezcDLdYTMyRpVDDP44+0A==
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 01:22:43 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABAAD8A9FE3@dggeml511-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.164.123.168]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/vspPkvTP53FcstguH0KQOpGkHo4>
Subject: Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: loopback addresses
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: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 01:23:47 -0000

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Acee Lindem (acee)
发送时间: 2020年7月31日 5:06
收件人: Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net>et>; Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>
抄送: Carlos Pignataro (cpignata) <cpignata@cisco.com>om>; netmod@ietf.org
主题: Re: [netmod] rfc6991bis: loopback addresses

Hi Kent,

On 7/30/20, 4:55 PM, "netmod on behalf of Kent Watsen" <netmod-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of kent@watsen.net> wrote:


    > Thanks for pointing to the definitions in draft-nainar-mpls-lsp-ping-yang.
    > With that, your request is relatively clear now

    Looking at draft-nainar-mpls-lsp-ping-yang, the proposal is a “typedef” that constrains inet:ipv[46]-address so that it can only contain loopback address values.


    > and the question the WG
    > needs to answer is whether these types are common enough to warrant being
    > part of inet-types, i.e., are there any other places where these types
    > may be useful?

    I don’t think so, but I’m not a routing person.

I wouldn't think that an internal loopback address would be widely used. In fact, I checked our Cisco native models for IOS-XE and there is no such definition. 

[Qin]: I am not sure we are talking about loopback type or loopback address
See section 2.4 in draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang-10, 3 type loopbacks are defined:
1.Internal loopback
2.Line loopback
3.Loopback Connector
3 types loopback can be classified into local loopback and remote loopback.
I am not sure they are common, but we have some support for this. 

Thanks,
Acee


    > /js

    K.  // contributor
    _______________________________________________
    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