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

["Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]>]

Thanks much Reshad - Yingzhen will be adding but the ietf-ospf-bfd module
to the OSPF model and draft.

Acee 

On 7/28/17, 11:08 AM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>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)" <[e-mail]> 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)" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Acee,
>>>
>>>What I see @ 
>>>https://github.com/jhaas-pfrc/ietf-bfd-yang/blob/master/src/yang/ietf-bf
>>>d
>>>-
>>>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)" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi Reshad, 
>>>>
>>>>On 7/27/17, 3:35 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <[e-mail]>
>>>>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-b
>>>>f
>>>>d
>>>>-
>>>>t
>>>>ypes.yang only has the enabled leaf.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Acee 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>Reshad.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>On 2017-07-27, 3:30 PM, "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Reshad, 
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 7/27/17, 3:19 PM, "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>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)" <[e-mail]> 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)" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Hi Yingzhen,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The grouping is available @
>>>>>>>>>https://github.com/jhaas-pfrc/ietf-bfd-yang/blob/master/src/yang/i
>>>>>>>>>e
>>>>>>>>>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" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>>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:[e-mail]]
>>>>>>>>>>Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2017 7:19 AM
>>>>>>>>>>To: Jeffrey Haas <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>>>Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>>>>>>>>>>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"
>>>>>>>>>><[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> 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,
>>>>>>>>>>>[e-mail]
>>>>>>>>>>>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/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>