Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com> Fri, 28 July 2017 21:25 UTC
Return-Path: <mjethanandani@gmail.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 12ED7132199; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 0rcfZsGsaqi4; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi0-x244.google.com (mail-oi0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CB3D132198; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi0-x244.google.com with SMTP id v11so19793560oif.1; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=lPTKFQyjFllgi8vsTVSE66saVjm8zEGN3XR46qLx5cA=; b=utWezermkKUEQicEpDM0AFSvakuxISBrcclfr/Qp8IyAr5jG2ImAqen4EKRX2XbyHe YSyUvK2zEYpCuZG3lEbDhvCQcdqROp7hr/U7M2eot4TzcLPj2lFzd9GicX81P8rD6mCG fnL3R39xkfCXdenFTYg+/ANmdGk3vW3SiDe3LgfeBVoE5RymGYR6geNjj6ePgpxD7Y8N KC6fy0hCsuRiFesFgL2hauU9OnbaEtHbnPsUnlgKn+4SvzrGf5m/6sMlCaOWenBGnhyn vcEGIzXGNrsRle/QB8Bc7QSqadb0lWlMKDphdU69r5Zs+kKCPlpileYJPrMx0o+mqtew M48g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=lPTKFQyjFllgi8vsTVSE66saVjm8zEGN3XR46qLx5cA=; b=OANybS/iRpegnZ0KN9Jvd0aZMgQh5TXbHLDtZOEibTkiJutbCEve7ANVwW4/Bs3AOv xrNDAmAjxruaYfkE/nt0EA5wK6zYgf8wrqUAspbomcVeTV2yPImoGHrvCPWxfrIpekAY vK4LPeAcHdh6I9uu2ihziSHghC0lPlB4PT0I4xMT3R0/mKJENE8iYAdMvyFXFuVSgQ+7 eeNNBjGZIG8UVZxV+8BDKACnBAADJ5XHxwbbpxnlxCJ4ouabDI70hSRQyEsOGkdBhYfs U4ijsWL431U+ZuoFvwoxoXaR4zRWMc7Wk393R/VultvdOv6XYmKvcPLAaGntQ2JCEcoq SBhw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw113JVTjv/55CIe0x6kChlEuu8LfylyKd13wERHccN2K34ZBFbGki 57TLYyJUNyBQWg==
X-Received: by 10.202.77.3 with SMTP id a3mr8512074oib.64.1501277115431; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:420:30d:1320:1142:f772:6d85:788d? ([2001:420:30d:1320:1142:f772:6d85:788d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h67sm20473669oic.43.2017.07.28.14.25.14 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:14 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt
From: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <D5A01A7B.BA49E%acee@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 14:25:27 -0700
Cc: Reshad Rahman <rrahman@cisco.com>, Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.qu@huawei.com>, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>, "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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C71CC69E-DAE4-49E0-983A-9B2EE9B4CD46@gmail.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>
To: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/XZaEhMYEMALShbkTP9msSk83U9w>
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 21:25:19 -0000
Would it not be better to call bfd-grouping-base-cfg-parms something like bfd-grouping-client-cfg-params or more simply client-cfg-params. We know it is a grouping and we know it is a bfd grouping. Why repeat? > On Jul 27, 2017, at 7:34 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-bfd >>> - >>> 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/iet >>>>>>>> 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>; 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/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanandani@gmail.com
- I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt internet-drafts
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Yingzhen Qu
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Yingzhen Qu
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Yingzhen Qu
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Yingzhen Qu
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Yingzhen Qu
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- RE: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Yingzhen Qu
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Ashesh Mishra
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Jeffrey Haas
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-06.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt t petch
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt tom petch
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt Reshad Rahman (rrahman)
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt tom petch
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt tom petch
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt Reshad Rahman
- Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17.txt Greg Mirsky