Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt

"Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com> Fri, 28 July 2017 15:08 UTC

Return-Path: <rrahman@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E5BA131C7A; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.523
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.523 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 fs_vT7wUeKvx; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-3.cisco.com (alln-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.142.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96D4C131566; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:08:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=12210; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1501254530; x=1502464130; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=172gH119Ogq04brhHUlQffsfRB2MBPaosgdZwMUquw4=; b=cNbiuXU4S31MKOaXebrwXajEZKS8pvtyywL0+izJUhKPZJDM+gw+8v1t ImRvJDl50ENgDGSgpkjeWk4sw//NK9L++MUN6X1mG2r3KcVuPBZB5awIK JpbUh6g8Dx1ISphabIJzSVypGMy3ocvgCxU5SVIpVyK3PMrtt6ZwXyfEF o=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AQAQB6UntZ/4QNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg1pkbScHjgaPeoFrlgsOggQuhRkCGoNYPxgBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIU?= =?us-ascii?q?YAQEBAQM0RQwEAgEIEQQBAQEEIwUCAjAUCQgCBAENBYovEJEPnVwGgiiLPwEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAR2BBYIjg02FCIMmgRoBEgE2gnaCZwWfbQKHTYx?= =?us-ascii?q?XggxXhHuKXpVxAR84fwt3FR+FQByBZgF2h0INFweBBQGBDQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,425,1496102400"; d="scan'208";a="462280624"
Received: from alln-core-10.cisco.com ([173.36.13.132]) by alln-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 28 Jul 2017 15:08:49 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (xch-rcd-015.cisco.com [173.37.102.25]) by alln-core-10.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6SF8m3Z019073 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:08:48 GMT
Received: from xch-rcd-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) by XCH-RCD-015.cisco.com (173.37.102.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 10:08:48 -0500
Received: from xch-rcd-005.cisco.com ([173.37.102.15]) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com ([173.37.102.15]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 10:08:48 -0500
From: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
Thread-Index: AQHS8drqXiPB9yzw8Uyz6SEnSzAzYaJFxYCAgBeSvYCAAT4qwIAGf4+AgAMdioCAABQjAP//8hkAgAASYgD///B3AIAAawoAgAAI1YCAAOOAAA==
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:08:48 +0000
Message-ID: <D5A0AFE7.2CF6C3%rrahman@cisco.com>
References: <149885255897.4584.3006333522740435620@ietfa.amsl.com> <20170705162103.GQ2289@pfrc.org> <D596866E.2C3552%rrahman@cisco.com> <594D005A3CB0724DB547CF3E9A9E810B5227CF@dfweml501-mbb> <D59904F6.2C51B4%rrahman@cisco.com> <D59FB0AD.BA38A%acee@cisco.com> <D59FB38C.2CE83D%rrahman@cisco.com> <D59FB594.BA3A0%acee@cisco.com> <D59FB7D2.2CE8F1%rrahman@cisco.com> <D59FB934.BA3C3%acee@cisco.com> <D59FBE2A.2CEA06%rrahman@cisco.com> <D5A01A7B.BA49E%acee@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D5A01A7B.BA49E%acee@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.7.1.161129
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [161.44.212.44]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="euc-kr"
Content-ID: <97637216BB0D37458E7C2FD5DA982020@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/MFFNjsVDBjr8DlGhOLF0-6CKEh8>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-bfd/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:08:53 -0000

Hi Acee,

Got rid of ietf-bfd-clients. I have added example-bfd-client module to
provide an example.

Regards,
Reshad.



On 2017-07-27, 10:34 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:

>Hi Reshad, 
>
>Ok - I see now. I was looking at the wrong xxxx-base-cfg-parms groupings.
>Fewer similar grouping and modules will be better ;^)
>
>Thanks,
>Acee
>
>On 7/27/17, 9:03 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi Acee,
>>
>>What I see @ 
>>https://github.com/jhaas-pfrc/ietf-bfd-yang/blob/master/src/yang/ietf-bfd
>>-
>>t
>>ypes.yang:
>>1) bfd-client-base-cfg-parms has leaf enabled only. BTW this grouping is
>>defined twice, this will be fixed when I get rid of ietf-bfd-clients.yang
>>2) bfd-grouping-base-cfg-parms has multiplier/timers.
>>
>>Let me get rid of the client module and have everything in the types
>>module.
>>
>>I am not sure why you’re not seeing something different.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Reshad.
>>
>>
>>
>>On 2017-07-27, 3:40 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Reshad, 
>>>
>>>On 7/27/17, 3:35 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Acee,
>>>>
>>>>1) I’ll see if others chime in on this but I am fine with having the
>>>>client grouping in ietf-bfd-types.yang.
>>>>2) bfd-grouping-common-cfg-parms has much more than just the
>>>>multiplier/timers that the IGPs need. It also has BFD specific stuff
>>>>(demand-mode, BFD auth) which IMO has no business outside of BFD.
>>>
>>>Agreed. 
>>>
>>>
>>>>bfd-grouping-base-cfg-parms has only the multiplier/timers.
>>>
>>>Perhaps, the addition of multiplier/timers to
>>>bfd-grouping-base-cfg-parms
>>>isn’t pushed to GitHub yet. This version
>>>https://github.com/jhaas-pfrc/ietf-bfd-yang/blob/master/src/yang/ietf-bf
>>>d
>>>-
>>>t
>>>ypes.yang only has the enabled leaf.
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Acee 
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Reshad.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On 2017-07-27, 3:30 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi Reshad, 
>>>>>
>>>>>On 7/27/17, 3:19 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Acee,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>When we met we agreed to have a new model for clients. Afterwards I
>>>>>>decided to create a new types module, and still went ahead with the
>>>>>>clients module. I am fine with having everything in the types module
>>>>>>(no
>>>>>>client module).
>>>>>
>>>>>Although I don’t feel that strongly - I just don’t see that putting
>>>>>the
>>>>>client config params in wrappers provides any benefit. As for
>>>>>detriments,
>>>>>it requires more one more local modules for validation and one more
>>>>>level
>>>>>of indirection to see what we are really allowing to be configured.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I am not sure I fully understand your comment/question on
>>>>>>bfd-client-ext-cfg-parms/bfd-grouping-common-cfg-parms. The reason we
>>>>>>have
>>>>>>2 groupings is that some protocols may decide to have just the enable
>>>>>>leaf
>>>>>>and others may also want the multiplier/timer.
>>>>>
>>>>>The bfd-client-ext-cfg-parms grouping should use
>>>>>bfd-types:bfd-grouping-common-cfg-parms rather than
>>>>>bfd-types:bfd-client-base-cfg-parms - no? This would be more obvious
>>>>>w/o
>>>>>the client module.
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>Acee 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>Reshad.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 2017-07-27, 3:07 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi Reshad, 
>>>>>>>Why do we need a new YANG model for clients? Why can’t they just use
>>>>>>>ietf-bfd-types.yang? I’d like to avoid the unnecessary levels of
>>>>>>>indirection. In fact, it looks wrong to me since the grouping
>>>>>>>bfd-client-ext-cfg-parms uses the grouping
>>>>>>>bfd-grouping-base-cfg-parms
>>>>>>>which only contains the enabled leaf. I believe you meant to use
>>>>>>>bfd-grouping-common-cfg-parms in the other new model. However, I
>>>>>>>don’t
>>>>>>>see
>>>>>>>any reason why client shouldn’t use this directly.
>>>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>>>Acee 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 7/25/17, 2:33 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Hi Yingzhen,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The grouping is available @
>>>>>>>>https://github.com/jhaas-pfrc/ietf-bfd-yang/blob/master/src/yang/ie
>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>f
>>>>>>>>-
>>>>>>>>b
>>>>>>>>f
>>>>>>>>d
>>>>>>>>-
>>>>>>>>c
>>>>>>>>lients.yang
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>If you¹d like changes to the grouping, send me an email.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>>>Reshad.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 2017-07-21, 12:22 PM, "Yingzhen Qu" <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hi Reshad,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Thanks for the summary.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Both ospf and isis models will make corresponding changes when the
>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>BFD grouping is available.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>Yingzhen
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>>From: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) [mailto:rrahman@cisco.com]
>>>>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:19 AM
>>>>>>>>>To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>rg>; rtg-bfd@ietf.org
>>>>>>>>>Cc: draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org; draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org
>>>>>>>>>Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>We (BFD and OSPF YANG authors) had a discussion yesterday.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The agreement is that since IGP peers are auto-discovered, we want
>>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>add
>>>>>>>>>back the basic BFD config (multiplier + intervals) in IGP via a
>>>>>>>>>grouping.
>>>>>>>>>BFD will provide that grouping in a specific YANG module. IGP BFD
>>>>>>>>>YANG
>>>>>>>>>will be in a separate module (separate from the main IGP module).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>>>>Reshad.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On 2017-07-05, 12:21 PM, "Rtg-bfd on behalf of Jeffrey Haas"
>>>>>>>>><rtg-bfd-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Thanks authors for the edits on the BFD yang module.  This gets
>>>>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>>>significant step closer to alignment with the rest of IETF for
>>>>>>>>>>network
>>>>>>>>>>instancing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I'd like to encourage the working group to provide feedback on
>>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>issue and also the changes in the module.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>As noted in another thread, we still have to figure out how to
>>>>>>>>>>deal
>>>>>>>>>>with accommodating interaction of the BFD yang module with client
>>>>>>>>>>protocols.
>>>>>>>>>>For
>>>>>>>>>>example, the IGPs.  In particular, how do you configure the
>>>>>>>>>>properties
>>>>>>>>>>of the BFD sessions that may be dynamically instantiated based on
>>>>>>>>>>control protocol activity?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>-- Jeff
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 12:55:59PM -0700,
>>>>>>>>>>internet-drafts@ietf.org
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
>>>>>>>>>>>Internet-Drafts
>>>>>>>>>>>directories.
>>>>>>>>>>> This draft is a work item of the Bidirectional Forwarding
>>>>>>>>>>>Detection
>>>>>>>>>>>of the IETF.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>         Title           : YANG Data Model for Bidirectional
>>>>>>>>>>>Forwarding
>>>>>>>>>>>Detection (BFD)
>>>>>>>>>>>         Authors         : Reshad Rahman
>>>>>>>>>>>                           Lianshu Zheng
>>>>>>>>>>>                           Mahesh Jethanandani
>>>>>>>>>>>                           Santosh Pallagatti
>>>>>>>>>>>                           Greg Mirsky
>>>>>>>>>>> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
>>>>>>>>>>> 	Pages           : 59
>>>>>>>>>>> 	Date            : 2017-06-30
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Abstract:
>>>>>>>>>>>    This document defines a YANG data model that can be used to
>>>>>>>>>>>configure
>>>>>>>>>>>    and manage Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD).
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bfd-yang/
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> There are also htmlized versions available at:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06
>>>>>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time
>>>>>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>>>>>submission  until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>>>>>>>>>>>tools.ietf.org.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>>>>>>>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>