Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation-framework-06.txt> (A Framework for Automating Service and Network Management with YANG) to Informational RFC

Brian E Carpenter <> Tue, 29 September 2020 19:54 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B22D53A1128; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.311
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.311 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.213, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gwXMAtPLZ7I7; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A4F83A1123; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id t7so3277114pjd.3; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ChIxes/7uQvf7oYlGPNBb0C8AR/JS2beRxgxGkM3uNA=; b=ftufpO10GmMiJIZIRi/aXDJrrZXA8oCweT0EyG1Ad1y0uTozmc/9G3+mZMM13B3kDb txf0+QFQN85tLEQTW9zvcfvgquLa2P/rpF0G8t9dsVNV8sFFvJwdAIuFD42GSgUWWoGO 2rq1GoTixWHHhQuIW4tOGbViuLmUUULu6Gl2DE4SUWma4YE23uS0O7f74Tcbqrjtsjfm EoANfYsQ5cFf0lLYsDWXYpM4C/cnB5VNQumNmHstSycEQCoV1F87a83p5kxjjftTrqsF 0FYlJChgyB0yeGccbd5nbPGCDkMyxCItBlBwVH1B/Hqebtf7C+CTZuPHD5oXENERYYj3 EPMQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ChIxes/7uQvf7oYlGPNBb0C8AR/JS2beRxgxGkM3uNA=; b=EdhjwwBbhoMEmXSxQhHcbyT4/nlhqYG78Dw0ujn2nnJBQMvNRycklnsYytQAPMXLg4 sCp2cuAWG73NVIHkBzwOH3N6WFaPOnqMihl8Ze0NBxRTa3C1zK+J770vHBRuTCRue3Oy pDVuzp9PtiCP8OM/IKFEZEKzp4Fp3epIeVtletmRa/Qg3bSlZxZaRSYUyJIiQVNv6Xdo ykOOoxg95l/snXZQIsLcoOe0b4N795pU83qP3N0Zjzq/C3GnOx3Yv78seWQ2DoIzDUHV MbE5ejzIybQWdl2LZ/N0Te6h1of4CQOYxvE6Ad0xvQ7EjkjX7uvMSRYFMr0+y/6M6rNa GQpQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5300L0HgkJFsH/vDRGdMA5Y0EzfUUM2G9aX/WhfEG427nwB7LLlC pnhWXhwMoUPUi1bge+5ltRSU/6LKAckA+A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzPR8fXoGCmTSnBX9yv4/C1Mur7+vjIqHbvNf1AxOcFrEZRasryhhnQKfT4pRQktLCrCbSmmw==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:d515:: with SMTP id t21mr5056335pju.149.1601409293163; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:54:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id z28sm6296981pfq.81.2020. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 12:54:52 -0700 (PDT)
To:, "" <>
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <13759_1601358037_5F72C8D5_13759_498_1_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933031549FD3@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 08:54:49 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <13759_1601358037_5F72C8D5_13759_498_1_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933031549FD3@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation-framework-06.txt> (A Framework for Automating Service and Network Management with YANG) to Informational RFC
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2020 19:54:56 -0000

Hi Med, see below...
On 29-Sep-20 18:40, wrote:
> Hi Brian, 
> Please see inline.
> Cheers,
> Med
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : Brian E Carpenter []
>> Envoyé : mardi 29 septembre 2020 00:25
>> À :
>> Cc :;
>> Objet : Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-opsawg-model-automation-
>> framework-06.txt> (A Framework for Automating Service and Network
>> Management with YANG) to Informational RFC
>> Hi,
>> I have a question for clarification, and then a comment.
>> First, consider these extracts:
>>> 5.1.  L2VPN/L3VPN Service Delivery
>>>    In reference to Figure 5, the following steps are performed to
>>>    deliver the L3VPN service within the network management
>> automation
>>>    architecture defined in this document:
>>>    1.  The Customer requests to create two sites (as per service
>>>        creation operation in Section 4.2.1)...
>> ...
>>> 5.2.  VN Lifecycle Management
>>>    In reference to Figure 7, the following steps are performed to
>>>    deliver the VN service within the network management automation
>>>    architecture defined in this document:
>>>    1.  Customer requests (service exposure operation in Section
>> 4.1.1)
>>>        to create 'VN' based on Access point...
>> ...
>>>    3.  The Customer exchanges connectivity-matrix on abstract node
>> and
>>>        explicit path using TE topology model with the
>> orchestrator...
>> In those examples, how does the customer "request" or "exchange"
>> data? I assume this is intended to happen by software, rather than
>> by telefax. 
> [Med] We hope this can be by software if we want to benefit from the automation in the full cycle but the approach still apply independently how a service request is captured. 
> We don't zoom that much on that interface because the document is more on the provider's side.
>> So what protocol is involved, and which entity on the
>> customer side is doing it?
> [Med] The component at the client side are generally represented as service ordering (see RFC 4176). That component may interact with the Order Handling at the provider side using a variety of means such as (Section 5) or by offering a management interface to the customer, etc. 

Well, I'd rather see a standardised and generic solution to that problem, as noted in my reply to Adrian. But indeed, that is the requirement.
> Please let us know if you think that we need to add some text on this part.

I think it needs just a few words in section 3 or 4, even just to say that the mechanism is out of scope for this document.

>>> 5.3.  Event-based Telemetry in the Device Self Management
>>>    In reference to Figure 8, the following steps are performed to
>>>    monitor state changes of managed objects or resources in a
>> network
>>>    device and provide device self-management within the network
>>>    management automation architecture defined in this document:
>>>    1.  To control which state a network device should be in or is
>>>        allowed to be in at any given time, a set of conditions and
>>>        actions are defined and correlated with network events
>> (e.g.,
>>>        allow the NETCONF server to send updates...
>> Second, this is the first mention of NETCONF in the document, and
>> the only other mention is in the Security Considerations. I suggest
>> that there should be a short description of the role of NETCONF (and
>> RESTCONF) earlier in the document, either in section 3 or more
>> likely in section 4 (Functional Blocks and Interactions).
> [Med] Point taken. We will also clarify that in some cases the use of YANG does not require NETCONF/RESTCONF. 

Thanks. (For example, draft-ietf-anima-grasp-distribution can serve for distributing YANG.)

>> Regards
>>    Brian Carpenter
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
> pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
> a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
> Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
> they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.