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

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 28 July 2017 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <acee@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 21545131CA2; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:55:43 -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 gbGV-v5fhlme; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09F89129A96; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=13036; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1501257340; x=1502466940; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=NHY873AGS9hOE3YPoGjlcypaq2C+v0sZpENFB3jvI4g=; b=QdUgSdh1CGX6fwhv9pqBuNU+s/E+CH341Qet+JAeWgfZiMzkBR0lxZLd cJfa4dy2z5i4SU2treL0dO+M/yc/+4LEXHIBNiO1GldSrTm1dWZIB/Quo QaKgiwe/Zj+0PE07jFg1heVcaVPD8A7D3Jh/Rwfw6HEGRI8FT71UQc/qR 0=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AQAQAdXXtZ/4oNJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg1pkbScHjgaPeoFrlgsOggQuhRkCGoNYPxgBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIU?= =?us-ascii?q?YAQEBAQMjEUUMBAIBCBEEAQEBAgIjAwICAjAUAQgIAgQBDQWKLxCvNYImiz8BA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEdgQuCHYhVgyaBGgESATaCfIJhBZ9tAodNjFe?= =?us-ascii?q?CDFeEe4pelXEBHzh/C3cVH4VAHIFmAXaHQg0XB4EFgQ4BAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.40,425,1496102400"; d="scan'208";a="460831809"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 28 Jul 2017 15:55:38 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com (xch-rtp-005.cisco.com [64.101.220.145]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v6SFtcrZ016068 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:55:38 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-005.cisco.com (64.101.220.145) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 11:55:37 -0400
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) by XCH-RTP-015.cisco.com ([64.101.220.155]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Fri, 28 Jul 2017 11:55:37 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@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///B3AIAAawoAgAAI1YCAAOOAAP///DeA
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2017 15:55:37 +0000
Message-ID: <D5A0D683.BA6A6%acee@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> <D5A0AFE7.2CF6C3%rrahman@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <D5A0AFE7.2CF6C3%rrahman@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.196]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <0210FDD2085C4348A0F68907F43265BB@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/g-flL-1OpbQ68q08pDGPDkJHJx0>
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 15:55:43 -0000

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)" <rrahman@cisco.com> 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)" <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-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)" <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-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)" <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/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" <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/
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>