Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Scope
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Tue, 28 July 2015 14:08 UTC
Return-Path: <acee@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-yang-coord@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B3AD1A92EC; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 07:08:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.51
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham
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 9HBpYqPKOIRU; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 07:08:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-6.cisco.com (alln-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.142.93]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6162E1A9231; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 07:07:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=22428; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1438092464; x=1439302064; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=JrmhipDCPP4ONWxiN8UjodATuvgxB1rX/Qk5qmoTqRA=; b=TgDb8hpmBLW/vWvD9VDrZsFU0Hzh7URLcRzGjzxOnFcddhvw3VvJx4j/ oCwhFxZMj/MHS5HrG4KURVeZlYTKvijlVInf2khNoF9hOQrS/RBEGNrIm o+nXRKF7T+WmFsRNKa1JuxOVwxQUo9MhXx8wdLzGE8wokdBCPchtKF45m k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AEBABli7dV/5BdJa1SAQmCSE1UaQaDHbkNCYF3AQmFeQIcgTc4FAEBAQEBAQGBCoQkAQEEAQEBIEsLEAIBCA4ELQMCAgIfBgsUAw4CBA4DAogZAxINuW+QXA2FLwEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARMEi06CToFcAVgEB4JpL4EUBZFrgn0BileBapF+hy0mZIMZQi0BgQYlHIEEAQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,563,1432598400"; d="scan'208,217";a="173088136"
Received: from rcdn-core-8.cisco.com ([173.37.93.144]) by alln-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 28 Jul 2015 14:07:42 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com [173.37.183.76]) by rcdn-core-8.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6SE7gQY021250 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 28 Jul 2015 14:07:42 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x06.cisco.com ([169.254.1.37]) by xhc-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([173.37.183.76]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 28 Jul 2015 09:07:42 -0500
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Scope
Thread-Index: AQHQyBKPtAZjqBZX7EimmnBlKBFrDZ3vbc2AgABdoICAAXXFgA==
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 14:07:41 +0000
Message-ID: <6D8CFA7E-4E24-4FC2-BB69-31F4F436ACFC@cisco.com>
References: <D1DAB06D.298C6%acee@cisco.com> <20150726204927.GA17784@elstar.local> <B2F97D6D-C316-4176-83E3-E08E6F553E9D@gmail.com> <D1DBB3C4.2991F%acee@cisco.com> <022BA705-5EA2-4C4D-B012-EF2946F5F523@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <022BA705-5EA2-4C4D-B012-EF2946F5F523@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.116.152.204]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_6D8CFA7E4E244FC2BB6931F4F436ACFCciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-yang-coord/mKpQUOcOYWOzJhdLRgbnON8HMio>
Cc: "rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org" <Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>, YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Scope
X-BeenThere: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "\"List to discuss coordination between the Routing related YANG models\"" <rtg-yang-coord.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-yang-coord>, <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-yang-coord/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord>, <mailto:rtg-yang-coord-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 14:08:52 -0000
Mahesh, The networking-instance is used to instantiate separate layer-3 or layer-2 domains as opposed to protocol domains. For example, in many implementations, a networking-instance would correspond to a VRF or a Virtual Switch Instance (VSI). Hence, it would not make sense to define a separate networking-instance for MPLS since it is only one piece of a layer-3 domain. Thanks, Acee On Jul 27, 2015, at 11:49 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com>> wrote: Acee, The boiler plate goals and approach does not answer what I thought was a very specific question. Let me reiterate: What was thought behind defining a mpls feature in the devices model, vs say defining networking-instance as a 'type identityref’ which would form a base identity, and from which specific networking-instance types such as mpls would be derived? The latter in my mind lays the framework for how models could augment the base devices model without defining each and every feature, while the former has to define at least a basic model for each feature which then would have to be augmented anyway to realize the full feature. Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanandani@gmail.com<mailto:mjethanandani@gmail.com> On Jul 27, 2015, at 7:14 AM, Acee Lindem (acee) <acee@cisco.com<mailto:acee@cisco.com>> wrote: Is the idea that the device model is trying to define everything under a device tree? I would have thought that the device model would define networking-instance as a 'type identityref’ which would form a base identity, and from which specific networking-instance types would be derived, such as mpls - much like what the interfaces model does for all types of interfaces. That will allow the device model to be a fairly compact model, leaving the feature specific models to be developed elsewhere. The design team started with https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-openconfig-netmod-model-structure-00.txt and went through several iterations. The motivation excerpted from this draft is: 1.1. Goals and approach In this document, we describe a structure for organizing YANG [RFC6020] models that is broadly applicable to physical and virtual devices. Individual models are composed such that the data they define can be accessed in a predictable and operationally intuitive way that is common across implementations. This organization enables several important capabilities: o a common schema to access data related to all aspects of a device o an extensible structure that makes it clear where additional models or data should be fit (e.g., using YANG augmentation or imports) o a place for including metadata that provides useful information about the corresponding individual models, such as which organization provides them, which vendors support them, or which version of the model is deployed o a common infrastructure model layer on which higher layer service models can be built, for example by specifying which models are needed to provide the service o an ability to express an instance of the structure consisting of models that have been validated to work together (i.e., with information about sources of the models, their versions, etc.), so that operators can easily identify a set of models that is known to be mutually consistent Our approach is to organize the models describing various aspects of network infrastructure, including devices and their subsystems, and relevant protocols operating at the link and network layers. The proposal does not consider a common model for higher level network services, nor does it specify details of how hardware-related data should be organized. Both of these are challenging to standardize -- services are subject to operational and business considerations that vary across network operators, and hardware models are necessarily dependent on specific platform features and architecture -- and are thus out of scope of this document. We instead consider the set of models that are commonly used by network operators, and suggest a corresponding organization. As with other models developed from an operator perspective, the intent is not to be exhaustive by including all possible models in the overall structure, whether currently available or not. We focus on components that are deemed most useful for network operators across a variety of use cases. We recognize, however, that additional models will be needed in some cases, and this structure is useful for describing how new models can be fit into the overall structure. _______________________________________________ Rtg-yang-coord mailing list Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org<mailto:Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord
- [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Scope Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Rob Shakir
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Nadeau Thomas
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Alia Atlas
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Mahesh Jethanandani
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Lou Berger
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Lou Berger
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Lou Berger
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] [yang-doctors] Routing YANG … Benoit Claise
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] [yang-doctors] Routing YANG … Lou Berger
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Lou Berger
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Andy Bierman
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] [yang-doctors] Routing YANG … Nadeau Thomas
- Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] Routing YANG Design Team Sco… Lou Berger