Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt

"Wubo (lana)" <lana.wubo@huawei.com> Fri, 11 November 2022 11:00 UTC

Return-Path: <lana.wubo@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C7FC14F738; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 03:00:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rdDsJonXSm6N; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 03:00:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6ACCDC14F72C; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 03:00:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fraeml745-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.226]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4N7wfN1bvGz67XMQ; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 18:58:04 +0800 (CST)
Received: from kwepemi100013.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.136) by fraeml745-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.226) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.31; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 12:00:21 +0100
Received: from kwepemi500014.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.232) by kwepemi100013.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.31; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 19:00:19 +0800
Received: from kwepemi500014.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.232]) by kwepemi500014.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.232]) with mapi id 15.01.2375.031; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 19:00:19 +0800
From: "Wubo (lana)" <lana.wubo@huawei.com>
To: "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>, "draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org>
CC: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, "opsawg@ietf.org" <opsawg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt
Thread-Index: Adj1vJrM8hnAE6YiRT6ITQmg7AqgYg==
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:00:19 +0000
Message-ID: <84a760409c5c4ede90626f7d94657e24@huawei.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.48.145.149]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_84a760409c5c4ede90626f7d94657e24huaweicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/DmfDudgQrhDDAJJbmxe260lMBTI>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:00:29 -0000

Hi Rob,

Sorry for the delay. Here is the update:
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-15

Thanks,
Bo

发件人: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com>
发送时间: 2022年11月11日 10:37
收件人: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@huawei.com>; draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org
抄送: adrian@olddog.co.uk; opsawg@ietf.org
主题: RE: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt

Hi Bo,

Just a quick reminder that you can post a -15 (which I don’t think that I have seen), and then I can approve this.

Regards,
Rob


From: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@huawei.com<mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>>
Sent: 25 October 2022 08:26
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>>; draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>; opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt

Hi Rob,

Many thanks for your suggestion. We will submit R-15 to fix this when the I-D submission reopen.

Thanks,
Bo

From: Rob Wilton (rwilton) [mailto:rwilton@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2022 6:06 PM
To: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@huawei.com<mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>>; draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>; opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt

Hi Bo,

I think that “limit-number” name makes more sense in the context of the other peer leaves around it when it is defined under “mac-addr-limit”, i.e., the “time-interval”, and what action is being taken.

My “no hats” opinion is that I would still go for consistency with the other counters under entry-summary.  E.g., using the same naming convention between the “maximum” and the “active”, and between v4, v6 and mac addresses.  If it helps you could also make the relationship to mac-policies/limit-number clear as part of the description.

But I’ll leave this entirely as the authors decision, this is just a minor non-blocking comment.

Regards,
Rob


From: Wubo (lana) <lana.wubo@huawei.com<mailto:lana.wubo@huawei.com>>
Sent: 21 October 2022 10:41
To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>>; draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>; opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt


Hi Rob,



Thanks for the review and suggestion.



Per the naming of "mac-limit-number", we are considering to be consistent with L2NM definition:



https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9291:

              |     +--rw mac-policies

              |     |  +--rw mac-addr-limit

              |     |  |  +--rw limit-number?    uint16

              |     |  |  +--rw time-interval?   uint32

              |     |  |  +--rw action?          Identityref



Do you think this makes sense?



Thanks,

Bo



-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Wilton (rwilton) [mailto:rwilton@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2022 5:31 PM
To: draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm.all@ietf.org>
Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>; opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt



Hi authors, shepherd,



Thanks for quickly posting a new version of draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm addressing the AD comments during the IESG review.



The changes all look good to me, except that I question one of the changes that were made (in response to one of Eric's comments I think):



     augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node:

       +--rw node-type?       identityref

       +--ro entry-summary

          +--ro ipv4-num

          |  +--ro maximum-routes?        uint32

          |  +--ro total-active-routes?   uint32

          +--ro ipv6-num

          |  +--ro maximum-routes?        uint32

          |  +--ro total-active-routes?   uint32

          +--ro mac-num

             +--ro mac-limit-number?       uint32

             +--ro total-active-mac-num?   uint32



mac-num-limit has been changed from mac-num-limit to max-limit-number, but I was wondering whether you considered trying to make the names for the mac entry limits more consistent with the names of the IP route limits.  E.g.,



     augment /nw:networks/nw:network/nw:node:

       +--rw node-type?       identityref

       +--ro entry-summary

          +--ro ipv4-num

          |  +--ro maximum-routes?        uint32

          |  +--ro total-active-routes?   uint32

          +--ro ipv6-num

          |  +--ro maximum-routes?        uint32

          |  +--ro total-active-routes?   uint32

          +--ro mac-num

             +--ro maximum-mac-entries?       uint32

             +--ro total-active-mac-entries?   uint32



This is a just a suggestion.  Please let me know if you wish to make this change and post an updated draft, or whether you would like me to proceed with approving the -14 version.



Regards,

Rob





> -----Original Message-----

> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org> <internet-drafts@ietf.org<mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>>

> Sent: 21 October 2022 09:37

> To: adrian@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>; Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@cisco.com<mailto:rwilton@cisco.com>>

> Subject: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-

> 14.txt

>

>

> A new version (-14) has been submitted for draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-

> service-pm:

> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14.txt

>

> Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed

>

>

> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm/

>

> Diff from previous version:

> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-opsawg-yang-vpn-service-pm-14

>

> IETF Secretariat.

>