Re: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model
"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Sun, 10 January 2021 22:28 UTC
Return-Path: <acee@cisco.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 AF9063A134B; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 14:28:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -11.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 header.b=QO9UU0Co; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=w4D15vhx
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 FbeLrtkqn44s; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 14:28:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F20163A134A; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 14:28:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=20781; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1610317694; x=1611527294; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=RJ14U5T8WWsjzB6PE3QQ+Tel6gI501FxIGbu4YRDxTU=; b=QO9UU0Cox1c8X+q9wxyzrNv/IdsaFJ1jaB4lokeE47tLOXLMPgXblrzB FoGLf8Sdp+AFbHLE437/8N6YZ6c9fzcN/of1KGNJk3KOgl542CLLznagB bN44dvMfrCWJwaYqqJMLxYVqOigT0dYX03qIgC+QKGq3eq08YLjOfl1dX s=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:tHnM9xChZnr2i2YQD/B9UyQJPHJ1sqjoPgMT9pssgq5PdaLm5Zn5IUjD/qw00A3GWIza77RPjO+F+6zjWGlV55GHvThCdZFXTBYKhI0QmBBoG8+KD0D3bZuIJyw3FchPThlpqne8N0UGF8P3ZlmUqXq3vnYeHxzlPl9zIeL4UofZk8Ww0bW0/JveKwVFjTawe/V8NhKz+A7QrcIRx4BlL/U8
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CuCAAjfvtf/49dJa1iHQEBAQEJARIBBQUBgg+BIzBRB3ZbLy4KhDWDSAONSyUDihyKA4RzglMDVAsBAQENAQEjCgIEAQGESgIXgVkCJTgTAgMBAQsBAQUBAQECAQYEcYVhDIVzAQEBBCMdAQE3AQ8CAQgRAwECKAMCAgIfERQJCAIEAQ0FCYMdAYF+VwMuAQ6iDQKKJXaBMoMEAQEGgUdBgwMNC4IQCYE4gnWDfQGBCoU0JhuCAIERJwwQglY+ghs3CwIDAYF7DQmCYjSCCiKBTwqBTwQbNwFgARqBFZAQR4J3hzGcXwkwWAqCd4krhnyGG4UdAx+DKYovlQiUEosWgniPEoQgAgQCBAUCDgEBBoFtI4FXcBUaSwGCPglHFwINjiGDcYUUhUR0AjUCBgEJAQEDCXyKGy2BBgGBEAEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,337,1602547200"; d="scan'208,217";a="824526632"
Received: from rcdn-core-7.cisco.com ([173.37.93.143]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 10 Jan 2021 22:28:12 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (xch-rcd-003.cisco.com [173.37.102.13]) by rcdn-core-7.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 10AMSCrK024230 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:28:12 GMT
Received: from xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) by XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (173.37.102.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 16:28:12 -0600
Received: from xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) by xhs-rtp-003.cisco.com (64.101.210.230) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 17:28:11 -0500
Received: from NAM02-BL2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (173.37.151.57) by xhs-aln-003.cisco.com (173.37.135.120) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 16:28:11 -0600
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=bKgBVn/cZG5wSlTqPtfBd09fsxNpYuQvYfWMi3Bf4GXIdjTyqoDW1N77pGTr/9x+byByAKowRkJO56eMUSE6aoPmeK9QEd8Ow78KunsFVC2o1YhPNEoiNF7sCLMaTo5zHcPSmO3mdWbGvzMhASOJInZ6kZW2us1EutOZBu4CDa07LWEEMf1LSoRqboTkbuU8wN/KNLcq661dN++MyE+p/KUH381XwsjdvykL5U3A6Xkwp24KERdJs1vn09eZNEhxsGnFf9ZkBOhrNZqPRcWwB0bJt2Vdoziob3zzaIp02YQ6rUBKg9AC8uKzsb7BL/7JbuhRpJsWx+Uesl690fTZew==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=RJ14U5T8WWsjzB6PE3QQ+Tel6gI501FxIGbu4YRDxTU=; b=FcLoWZz6V3gW/HcNHDgQN1vOFEkpciAlL0O7Bf4B95n/Dv4tqKwSBBRBlpzw7Q/gFTOb6Gw4DsP59J3ymAJrjhH5BGpn2ijk3hyrWema7vh8ju0isW9FHuts6w2vxbdxVr7vDkgyhgJ9JFx2X8YjYcUeqWeHw31oCryafjdgdRIMGSYn1ol2eT50pOzk/NcexXDvxSxg17J7QrPmC7y5TEVmrI+gny8em3MQPsQRyg6xMOpwswNrM33Z0v3Wy2ybfxkU87AmIVUiupQaACmjvhGR1iOvBHrKv2gWxHsHlOlgqoVzneZ/RqwOFgkGgzU93c2kzHIiJwXF3RyMDXOQ7A==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cisco.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=cisco.com; dkim=pass header.d=cisco.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=RJ14U5T8WWsjzB6PE3QQ+Tel6gI501FxIGbu4YRDxTU=; b=w4D15vhxY76n3+htf9ZWVOSICsiXIjMEmePlohFA+OYiUqtT7KQaZds8el9N6j1lItyB5EK0OfNyO+CmhQ9VvTVBOr1bVE5xBcFehpG8kgANw4II3zbD7Fj6v2bsKK7lmK8YtKaNjLhPHKn6+PHT1met/Mc3HKmlKL1J1ak5KBw=
Received: from BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:89::27) by BY5PR11MB3958.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:18e::19) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3742.6; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:28:09 +0000
Received: from BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::65a7:2fad:a960:2557]) by BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::65a7:2fad:a960:2557%3]) with mapi id 15.20.3742.012; Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:28:09 +0000
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>, Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com>, "Rob Wilton (rwilton)" <rwilton@cisco.com>
CC: RTGWG <rtgwg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model@ietf.org>, rtgwg-chairs <rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model
Thread-Topic: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model
Thread-Index: AQHW5gar+IYYPvKEpUuiOXVP5fR7tqohcasA//+uMoA=
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:28:09 +0000
Message-ID: <4F14FF41-E1A7-4312-A9A4-87FE20A97E06@cisco.com>
References: <CAHzoHbt5JHA551SY7HHPumMCkRiek2jC0Sj=tZm2z11C7n2vFA@mail.gmail.com> <CABY-gOONpBQrFRrNtNt2nOYF521fk=KsOwqVGWKNuTWaAdgtJw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABY-gOONpBQrFRrNtNt2nOYF521fk=KsOwqVGWKNuTWaAdgtJw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.44.20121301
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;gmail.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [136.56.133.70]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 41fe7cd9-4930-4f7f-a69f-08d8b5b7025a
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BY5PR11MB3958:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY5PR11MB39581A9D51894E2F7E7E1C21C2AC0@BY5PR11MB3958.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: VimyTZUqGQtlFcfQQex6pJIkB1c3AzOD7hdKkla0+koyRHsJNKA/EJU9swBPl2wFtK0w5pH8KiKaef8yVOTP9VajSrQPcJTCfRlq3UWQHINrSfH9Czo9q8qoZVUlwbFiPQdrmWiQQ99tzcXQXhpD/F0+FdSXl8QjrXO9nUZD3s9Rs+OxVdp2vm+VDXhjBGygYKqeK1MFNjiFpC0gDPaNGhLG6M0RbkazTDs5xwzyD8JahjJSP4iNAxS8I16efdbxTk05vIMXpyEf+TD9KVI1Jve6/aew/BP8juFhQsXcTwY3laRwPH85qjd7/YdTySfcWpYCuaLzyUafzIIuYsnUumpxRvg7EihZDU1tARWaw4msRZuQpfR30dYdmXt4CP4KTJT2xmmryT6pAX6ZNggnBnnDLGNb48yHUmQGVE83R+o8TsL0kb4Wkufg6dlkzkF9FSsucWbSomnH2W8nU3FPmmUtuFmXx/W3BO0XucZZ69fcGeBy+7buIcWGFR+1sxZr8RMUlat8EJ+Hu2tmR3WwfA==
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(136003)(366004)(39860400002)(376002)(346002)(396003)(83380400001)(186003)(76116006)(6512007)(66946007)(478600001)(966005)(6506007)(26005)(66556008)(2616005)(166002)(2906002)(8676002)(66446008)(53546011)(64756008)(6636002)(66476007)(6486002)(4326008)(71200400001)(36756003)(33656002)(54906003)(316002)(8936002)(5660300002)(110136005)(86362001)(45980500001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4F14FF41E1A74312A9A487FE20A97E06ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BYAPR11MB2887.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 41fe7cd9-4930-4f7f-a69f-08d8b5b7025a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 10 Jan 2021 22:28:09.4703 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: 3nYHUH0Rjl5viP5WmrcXef4Oe7Owaj1gvMkH/VBzr5YNJ443dktcPv/HO9CflpSH
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY5PR11MB3958
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.37.102.13, xch-rcd-003.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: rcdn-core-7.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/MbcjIU7QFns4OZl64j1xGlSdsWo>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 10 Jan 2021 22:28:17 -0000
+Rob for ietf-if-extensions.yang YANG validation warning…. Thanks, Acee From: Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com> Date: Sunday, January 10, 2021 at 5:21 PM To: Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com> Cc: Routing WG <rtgwg@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model@ietf.org>, rtgwg-chairs <rtgwg-chairs@ietf.org> Subject: Re: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model Resent-From: <alias-bounces@ietf.org> Resent-To: <yingzhen.qu@futurewei.com>, Jeff Tantsura <jefftant.ietf@gmail.com>, Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>, Xufeng Liu <xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com> Resent-Date: Sunday, January 10, 2021 at 5:21 PM Hi Chris, Thank you for your review and comments. I've uploaded version -27 and made changes as you suggested. The possible downref to module 'INTF-EXT-YANG' and 'SUB-INTF-VLAN-YANG' as defined in https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-intf-ext-yang/ is needed, and hopeful it will be published soon. Thanks, Yingzhen On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 1:38 PM Chris Bowers <chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:chrisbowers.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote: RTGWG and authors, There are a few items with respect to draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model that need to be addressed before I produce the final version of the Shepherd Writeup. http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ applied to draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model-26 produces 1 warning and 4 comments. Yang Validation for draft-ietf-rtgwg-policy-model-26 on 2021-01-07 listed one warning. Please address the following feedback on the text as well. Thanks, Chris ========= Current title: A YANG Data Model for Routing Policy Management Proposed title: A YANG Data Model for Routing Policy ========= Current abstract: This document defines a YANG data model for configuring and managing routing policies in a vendor-neutral way and based on actual operational practice. The model provides a generic policy framework which can be augmented with protocol-specific policy configuration. Proposed abstract: This document defines a YANG data model for configuring and managing routing policies in a vendor-neutral way. The model provides a generic routing policy framework which can be extended for specific routing protocols using the YANG 'augment' mechanism. ========= Section 1 Current text: The model is intended to be vendor-neutral, in order to allow operators to manage policy configuration in a consistent, intuitive way in heterogeneous environments with routers supplied by multiple vendors. Proposed text: The model is intended to be vendor-neutral, in order to allow operators to manage policy configuration in a consistent way in environments with routers supplied by multiple vendors. ========== Section 1.1 Current text: Despite the differences in details of policy expressions and conventions in various vendor implementations, the model reflects the observation that a relatively simple condition-action approach can be readily mapped to several existing vendor implementations, and also gives operators an intuitive and straightforward way to express policy without sacrificing flexibility. A side effect of this design decision is that legacy methods for expressing policies are not considered. Such methods could be added as an augmentation to the model if needed. Proposed text: Despite the differences in details of policy expressions and conventions in various vendor implementations, the model reflects the observation that a relatively simple condition-action approach can be readily mapped to several existing vendor implementations, and also gives operators a familiar and straightforward way to express policy. A side effect of this design decision is that other methods for expressing policies are not considered. =========== Section 4.1 Current text: o prefix sets - define a set of IP prefixes, each with an associated IP prefix and netmask range (or exact length) o neighbor sets - define a set of neighboring nodes by their IP addresses. These sets are used for selecting routes based on the neighbors advertising the routes. o tag set - define a set of generic tag values that can be used in matches for filtering routes Proposed text: o prefix sets - Each prefix set defines a set of IP prefixes, each with an associated IP prefix and netmask range (or exact length). o neighbor sets - Each neighbor set defines a set of neighboring nodes by their IP addresses. A neighbor set is used for selecting routes based on the neighbors advertising the routes. o tag sets - Each tag set defines a set of generic tag values that can be used in matches for filtering routes. ============ Section 4.4 Current text: For example, some major implementations may only support a single level of subroutine recursion. Proposed text: For example, an implementation may only support a single level of subroutine recursion. ============ Section 9.1 Current text: Conditions may include multiple match or comparison operations, and similarly actions may be a multitude of changes to route attributes or a final disposition of accepting or rejecting the route. Proposed text: Conditions may include multiple match or comparison operations. Actions may include changes to route attributes as well as a final disposition of accepting or rejecting the route.
- Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-po… Chris Bowers
- Re: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgw… Yingzhen Qu
- Re: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgw… Acee Lindem (acee)
- Re: Document Shepherd feedback on draft-ietf-rtgw… tom petch