Re: A question on OAM section in draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm

[Greg Mirsky <[e-mail]>]

Hi Med,
thank you for your detailed feedback; much appreciated. I think that I now
understand better the philosophy of the model. But I will note that RFC
5880 does not cover RFC 7880 and 8562 (both have updated RFC 5880). It
seems that adding bfd-session-type could be a very useful enhancement to
the OAM container. Values for the new parameter should reflect values
defined for bfd.SessionType in RFCs 7880, 8562, and 8563:

   - SBFDInitiator;
   - SBFDReflector;
   - PointToPoint;
   - MultipointHead;
   - MultipointTail;
   - MultipointClient

And my apologies for my late comments.

Regards,
Greg

On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 5:19 AM <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Greg,
>
>
>
> Thank you for checking the OAM part and for sharing this comment.
>
>
>
> As you can read in both sections 4 and 5, this model is ** not a device
> configuration model **. The focus is on aspects that can be triggered by
> service requests and managed by the network controller. This network view
> of the service will be then enriched (with other sources such as local
> templates/profiles/defaults) to derive the exhaustive configuration that
> will be enforced in involved devices to deliver the requested service.
>
>
>
> With that rationale in mind, you can understand why we don’t import device
> models but point to the authoritative RFCs for aspects that we think make
> sense to be tweaked at the network-level.
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> *De :* Greg Mirsky [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Envoyé :* samedi 28 août 2021 04:56
> *À :* [e-mail]; opsawg <[e-mail]>;
> rtg-bfd WG <[e-mail]>
> *Objet :* A question on OAM section in draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm
>
>
>
> Dear Authors,
>
> thank you for your work on this document. I've read the draft and have a
> question, and a suggestion. Section 7.6.4
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-l3sm-l3nm#section-7.6.4> describes
> how BFD is controlled in vpn-common. I've noticed that you use references
> to RFC 5880. While that is the basis for all subsequent BFD documents, for
> BFD YANG data model draft-ietf-bfd-yang
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-yang/> may be more
> useful. Perhaps the container oam can re-use grouping base-cfg-parms.
>
> What are your thoughts?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Greg
>
> _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
>
> 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.
>
>