IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Comments on draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model

"dingxiaojian (A)" <dingxiaojian1@huawei.com> Sat, 23 December 2017 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <dingxiaojian1@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D68127601; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 01:38:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.229
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 6D_z30DpTae3; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 01:38:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B23201201F8; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 01:38:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.107]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 3D5F8C5D6DEE6; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:38:02 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from DGGEMM403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.20.211) by lhreml704-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.45) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.361.1; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:38:03 +0000
Received: from DGGEMM506-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.4.14]) by DGGEMM403-HUB.china.huawei.com ([10.3.20.211]) with mapi id 14.03.0361.001; Sat, 23 Dec 2017 17:37:57 +0800
From: "dingxiaojian (A)" <dingxiaojian1@huawei.com>
To: "Reshad Rahman (rrahman)" <rrahman@cisco.com>, "draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model@ietf.org" <draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model@ietf.org>
CC: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: Comments on draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model
Thread-Index: AQHTXqZmpxZMAM+gQUaDjmmLEGi+qaNQ5YCA
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:37:57 +0000
Message-ID: <3B110B81B721B940871EC78F107D848C01072420@DGGEMM506-MBS.china.huawei.com>
References: <2A2E17F7-7A18-45AB-BF6D-3C1F58ABBE30@contoso.com>
In-Reply-To: <2A2E17F7-7A18-45AB-BF6D-3C1F58ABBE30@contoso.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.134.134.227]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_3B110B81B721B940871EC78F107D848C01072420DGGEMM506MBSchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/IeQNMMauMs-ONOWFntvo0EthPp0>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 09:38:08 -0000

Hi Reshad,
Thank you for your kind suggestions. Sorry for the delay, as I missed this mail in the wrong category. Please find my answers below.


  1.  Please look at the NMDA guidelines. I think e.g. you’d need to merge arp-static-tables and arp-tables into 1 table.
DXJ>> This is indeed the problem of this draft. However, the two tables cannot simply merged because the key "ip-address" of the new table cannot meet the requirement of arp entries inquiry. After discussion, we hold the arp-static-table and use the ‘augment’ to / interfaces-state / interface / ipv4 / neighbor of RFC 7277 to realize the ability of arp entries inquiry.


  1.  The tables have vrf-name as key. Take a look at draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model and how it is used by other YANG models.
DXJ>> based on the revision of arp-static-tables, vrf-name is not used as the key of arp-static-tables any more. In our opinion, arp static entries can be configured by ip-addr + mac-addr or vrf+ip-addr. The revised arp-static-tables realize the ability of configuration by ip-addr + mac-addr. For the first choice, static ARP table has been defined in /if:interfaces/if:interface/ip:ipv4/ip:neighbor.

Best regards,
Xiaojian


From: Reshad Rahman (rrahman) [mailto:rrahman@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2017 2:45 PM
To: draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model@ietf.org
Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org
Subject: Comments on draft-ding-netmod-arp-yang-model

Hi,

Took a quick look, 2 main comments:

  1.  Please look at the NMDA guidelines. I think e.g. you’d need to merge arp-static-tables and arp-tables into 1 table.
  2.  The tables have vrf-name as key. Take a look at draft-ietf-rtgwg-ni-model and how it is used by other YANG models.

Regards,
Reshad.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email