Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] yang models intended for the mpls wg

Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> Mon, 27 July 2015 15:52 UTC

Return-Path: <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.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 B8D6F1B2FCB; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 08:52:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 4zX2Z7_zlU-5; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 08:52:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 080EC1B2FC2; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 08:51:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c6180641-f794d6d000001dfb-fd-55b5eb2bbecc
Received: from EUSAAHC004.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.84]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 34.98.07675.B2BE5B55; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 10:26:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC004.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:51:12 -0400
From: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
To: Tom Taylor <tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com>, Mahesh Jethanandani <mjethanandani@gmail.com>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
Thread-Topic: [Rtg-yang-coord] yang models intended for the mpls wg
Thread-Index: AQHQxfSzBBpszcvFDEu5rxk1x880D53q3zmAgAGAFoCAAmx+UIAA5teA//++GACAAEnLgP//wC/A
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 15:51:12 +0000
Message-ID: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF112218850B1@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <55B207DD.8060502@pi.nu> <5436B667-6766-4F3D-902E-C4929D4A0240@gmail.com> <55B37EB3.60508@gmail.com> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF11221884D17@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <55B648D9.7060403@gmail.com> <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1122188504D@eusaamb103.ericsson.se> <55B64F77.9010308@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <55B64F77.9010308@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.10]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFvrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyuXRPiK72662hBk9WG1j8mzuH2eL0m3Vs Fr+f32a2uLD+F4tF364DjA6sHjtn3WX3WLLkJ5PHrOltbAHMUVw2Kak5mWWpRfp2CVwZlz9M Zim4o1/xf+5jlgbGM2pdjJwcEgImEtev/2GBsMUkLtxbz9bFyMUhJHCUUeLB9RYmCGc5o8Ts fT2MIFVsAkYSLzb2sIPYIgJlErPXHwPrZhaIlzi3eDsbiC0s4CSx6dAFRogaZ4kj8z8A1XAA 2VES3za4goRZBFQl1v3qAWvlFfCVWP14F9SuHUwS09avAZvPKaApcf3VcrA5jEDXfT+1hgli l7jErSfzmSCuFpBYsuc8M4QtKvHy8T9WCFtJYtLSc6wQ9ToSC3Z/YoOwtSWWLXzNDLFYUOLk zCcsExjFZiEZOwtJyywkLbOQtCxgZFnFyFFanFqWm25kuIkRGE/HJNgcdzAu+GR5iFGAg1GJ h/fB8y2hQqyJZcWVuYcYpTlYlMR5pf3yQoUE0hNLUrNTUwtSi+KLSnNSiw8xMnFwSjUwmrfu jIs2kpuW+3u2eLTptM8/Wpy4shOsLSbPZvr50Oy56r8lM+sdc6/tXhp0zY2lwvz/HcUrGq9F v8QqMk549dTkXibb7Mxvk785Gb0zkNggLhnPsOtMmsxe9/UCPua+akWbZz/8dY318ZVLPB/2 BiaL5P+cJ8xUIMe3kpvpxJLuyhR3tV+HlViKMxINtZiLihMBVyMLdIgCAAA=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-yang-coord/zwlgGlO8yLq76HYLYckjNIlr05k>
Cc: "rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org" <Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org>, YANG Doctors <yang-doctors@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] yang models intended for the mpls wg
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: Mon, 27 Jul 2015 15:52:31 -0000

Hi Tom,
I don't think that BFD is or will be used as on-demand OAM tool as it does not have localization capability. Ping or traceroute are more suitable, in my opinion. But if that is how LIME model maps existing OAM tools, then I'd encourage presenting and asking for review of the LIME model by WGs that designed this OAM mechanisms, e.g. MPLS Ping and BFD.

	Regards,
		Greg

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 8:34 AM
To: Gregory Mirsky; Mahesh Jethanandani; Loa Andersson
Cc: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org; YANG Doctors
Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] yang models intended for the mpls wg

I am not claiming that the capabilities of LSP ping are limited to those of tracert, or that the capabilities of BFD are limited to those of ping. I am saying that if I want to request these two functions (continuity check and hop-by-hop path characterization) at a generic level then the corresponding implementations at the MPLS technology-specific level would be invoked when the LIME RPCs were invoked at the boundaries of an MPLS segment.

The idea would be that once a fault was localized to that segment and to the MPLS layer as opposed to a supporting layer, the manager could invoke the technology-specific models as necessary to get details.

Tom

On 27/07/2015 11:18 AM, Gregory Mirsky wrote:
> Hi Tom,
> I think I cannot agree with any of your comparisons.
> LSP Ping provides both on-demand ping and traceroute functions.
> BFD, if you refer to RFC 5880, provides variety of functions, primarily as proactive continuity check (Asynchronous and on-demand modes, as well as ping by Echo mode). RFC 5884 BFD over MPLS LSP consider only Asynchronous mode.
> One can argue that ping may be used as proactive continuity check mechanism but that is not what it was originally designed and such application would, most likely, require use of another application, e.g. Measurement Agent per LMAP Reference model.
>
> I think it would be really helpful to define relationships between objects of LIME model and models specified in MPLS, BFD and other groups that had developed OAM tools that broadly used in the industry.
>
> 	Regards,
> 		Greg
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Taylor [mailto:tom.taylor.stds@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 8:06 AM
> To: Gregory Mirsky; Mahesh Jethanandani; Loa Andersson
> Cc: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org; YANG Doctors
> Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] yang models intended for the mpls wg
>
> LSP ping really corresponds to the generic tracert model, in that it provides hop-by-hop path characterization. I can see the LIME tracert RPC being invoked, and the MPLS nodes returning the parameters defined for that RPC to the extent that they correspond to what LSP ping reports.
>
> BFD seems to correspond quite nicely to LIME ping in terms of the function performed.
>
> Tom
>
> On 27/07/2015 1:36 AM, Gregory Mirsky wrote:
>> Hi Tom,
>> what is relationship between MPLS LSP Ping and "generic ping" models? Or, between BFD and "generic continuity check"?
>>
>> 	Regards,
>> 		Greg
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Rtg-yang-coord [mailto:rtg-yang-coord-bounces@ietf.org] On 
>> Behalf Of Tom Taylor
>> Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2015 5:19 AM
>> To: Mahesh Jethanandani; Loa Andersson
>> Cc: rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org; YANG Doctors
>> Subject: Re: [Rtg-yang-coord] yang models intended for the mpls wg
>>
>> The generic ping module is a LIME work item.
>>
>> Tom Taylor
>>
>> On 24/07/2015 9:24 AM, Mahesh Jethanandani wrote:
>>> [with yang doctor hat on]
>>>
>>> Loa,
>>>
>>> Has there been any discussion around how these models interact with each other or how the mpls WG would like to see the models structured.
>>>
>>> For example, from this list of models (and I admit I have not looked at a complete list of mpls related yang models or each in detail), a couple of questions arise.
>>>
>>> - Is there a plan for a generic mpls yang model?
>>> - plan for a more specific mpls-tp, mpls-te etc. yang model (they could be an extension of the more generic mpls model)?
>>> - plan for a generic ping module (may belong in NETMOD WG)?
>>> - plan for a mpls ping module (again an extension of the more generic ping module that interfaces with mpls module)?
>>> - plan for a ldp module that interfaces with the mpls module?
>>> - plan for a rsvp-te module that interfaces with mpls-te module?
>>>
>>> Having some structure to the models would probably help these and other yang authors in their design.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Mahesh Jethanandani
>>> mjethanandani@gmail.com
>>>
>>>> On Jul 24, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> There are four yang models intended for the MPLS working group, we 
>>>> have not yet started the process of adoption as working group documents.
>>>> The four documents are:
>>>>
>>>> 1. draft-zhang-mpls-tp-yang-oam (announced earlier) 2.
>>>> draft-zheng-mpls-lsp-ping-yang-cfg (announced now) 3.
>>>> draft-openconfig-mpls-consolidated-model (announced now) 4.
>>>> draft-raza-mpls-ldp-mldp-yang (announced now)
>>>>
>>>> /Loa
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
>>>> Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
>>>> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rtg-yang-coord mailing list
>>>> Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rtg-yang-coord mailing list
>>> Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rtg-yang-coord mailing list
>> Rtg-yang-coord@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-yang-coord
>>
>