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

Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> Tue, 01 August 2017 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jhaas@slice.pfrc.org>
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 F2D6B132003; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 07:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.903
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.903 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 PAr01vxnQ3vi; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 07:41:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from slice.pfrc.org (slice.pfrc.org [67.207.130.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A241241F5; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 07:41:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by slice.pfrc.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id AE5E91E37E; Tue, 1 Aug 2017 10:41:29 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2017 10:41:29 -0400
From: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Cc: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>, "rtg-bfd@ietf.org" <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bfd-yang@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ospf-yang@ietf.org>, Reshad Rahman <rrahman@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
Message-ID: <20170801144129.GC24942@pfrc.org>
References: <D59FBE2A.2CEA06%rrahman@cisco.com> <D5A01A7B.BA49E%acee@cisco.com> <C71CC69E-DAE4-49E0-983A-9B2EE9B4CD46@gmail.com> <D5A12762.2D4DB5%rrahman@cisco.com> <E4E310A2-A79C-403E-B68E-A39B76E2C5E0@gmail.com> <773E4FFC-D66A-49E5-A03A-58B7DBA82D90@gmail.com> <20170731170550.GO24942@pfrc.org> <BAF4C9E6-ED02-4E25-89DD-2FA181AF3B72@gmail.com> <3637B198-8F82-4A85-A4A1-4383AF98088D@pfrc.org> <D26CB257-E4B2-42FA-940E-BF77C8BC1751@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <D26CB257-E4B2-42FA-940E-BF77C8BC1751@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/WjM5WEHOoy1jkrPTexZKGVVTt_s>
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: Tue, 01 Aug 2017 14:41:17 -0000

Mahesh,

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 05:17:34PM -0700, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
> > My point, unless my very quick glance at the module mislead me, is that you can't configure to use echo mode - if it's supported - in the grouping imported by the IGPs.
> 
> In the current model, it is modeled as a separate grouping with its own set of parameters. The expectation is that implementations that want to define echo mode would use the grouping. Defining the parameters also implicitly defines that echo-mode is enabled. Are you saying that using the echo grouping is not enough? 

Minimally, I'm saying the IGP use is not pulling in the echo grouping either
directly or indirectly.

> But I do think that the parameters needs to be further protected by an if-feature statement that says
> 
>   grouping echo-cfg-parms {
>     if-feature echo-mode;
>     description 
>       "BFD grouping for echo config parameters”;

This seems correct.

> > My implementation doesn't support echo, so I don't have any opinion about where configuration of those belongs or not.
> 
> With the feature statement, these echo parameters can exist inside of client-cfg-parms, instead as a separate grouping and will be included by the platform only if the feature is defined. And this would be my preference. Is that what folks would also prefer?
> 

I'm ambivalent.  This depends really on real world behavior.

As we saw from some brief googling yesterday on Cisco IOS/IOS-XR docs, that
implementation doesn't appear to expose echo intervals as a separably
configurable item.  It did, however, expose a boolean to disable echo.

This minimally suggests that there should be a "use echo mode" flag.

The remaining homework is to figure out whether we should expose
configuration state for echo directly in this version of the yang.

-- Jeff