Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03.txt

"Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com> Fri, 12 May 2017 11:37 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 2831C127058 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 May 2017 04:37:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 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, 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
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 P75iHxfsIKAj for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 May 2017 04:37:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-5.cisco.com (alln-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.142.92]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3A8F129BBF for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 May 2017 04:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=4772; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1494588738; x=1495798338; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=EPRb97ydeaDVsnbjKAjhsOTH51qvfR4f/913Nm/WQXM=; b=awTtN3Qi8QzD7o8CjEYaT8WitNApeTKVL8y7gQxPePzf5ZFa4TDjybdy 3r91xaXDFLQ1ewJkyIt1A/EE4nvBQSLKt5MAk2YR7rmSbPak3vDOiCQY7 +evMPTgKB+42CZS/I2afgOwqJCSdM/AToKqTlaMv7qfriV1zlOMCEEKiO k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0DjAADWnBVZ/4ENJK1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBg1VigQwHg2SKGJFclXSCDyELhXgCGoR9PxgBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIUYAQEBAQMBASEROgsMBAIBCBEEAQEBAgImAgICJQsVCAgCBA4FiiMOrxuCJop0AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBHYELhzKDG4MhgUIXgnuCYAWeCgGHG4t/ggRVhGaKLJRCAR84gQpwFRwqhnV2h16BDQEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,329,1491264000"; d="scan'208";a="423664729"
Received: from alln-core-9.cisco.com ([173.36.13.129]) by alln-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 12 May 2017 11:32:17 +0000
Received: from XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (xch-rtp-012.cisco.com [64.101.220.152]) by alln-core-9.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v4CBWHmH029034 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 12 May 2017 11:32:17 GMT
Received: from xch-rtp-015.cisco.com (64.101.220.155) by XCH-RTP-012.cisco.com (64.101.220.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Fri, 12 May 2017 07:32:16 -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, 12 May 2017 07:32:16 -0400
From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
To: "t.petch" <ietfa@btconnect.com>
CC: "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03.txt
Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03.txt
Thread-Index: AQHSydckLXLt/qiTxkONWwnBWDhIAaHuHGuAgAJwb0+AAAZDAA==
Date: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:32:16 +0000
Message-ID: <D53B1400.AEB48%acee@cisco.com>
References: <149445284449.16685.6590051254547176953@ietfa.amsl.com> <D53903DB.AE8B6%acee@cisco.com> <034d01d2cb0f$df3f9600$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
In-Reply-To: <034d01d2cb0f$df3f9600$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
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: [10.116.152.206]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <F2301DAC8FE5C64E88DF0DBC6CA6368D@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/N6unOtYnvvK4Uu0GunuuM2J_TYg>
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: Fri, 12 May 2017 11:37:35 -0000

Hi Tom, 
I realized that IANA text similar to RFC 7224 will be required before
publishing the model. However, I was pressed for time and wanted to assure
people agreed with the structure before adding it.

A bigger question is whether IANA has the bandwidth to maintain an
increasing number of YANG models. Direct correlation to a registry would
be facilitated by the decoupling of IETF YANG models from the RFC process
(an ongoing discussion).

Thanks,
Acee 

On 5/12/17, 7:06 AM, "t.petch" <ietfa@btconnect.com> wrote:

>Acee
>
>I don't understand what you are doing.
>
>Martin suggested
>"                                       Since it is based on an IANA
>registry,
>>should it be in a separate IANA-maintained module, like iana-if-type
>>in RFC 7224?"
>
>but you have not done that.  You have produced a separate module in
>which IANA appears hundreds of times but that does not make it an
>IANA-maintained module IMO.  Look at RFC7224 s.3 to see what I think is
>missing.
>
>Tom Petch
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <acee@cisco.com>
>Cc: <rtgwg@ietf.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 10:54 PM
>Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03.txt
>
>
>> This version addresses Stewart’s RTG Directorate comments and Radek’s
>YANG
>> Doctor comments. It also splits iana-routing-types into a separate
>module.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Acee
>>
>> On 5/10/17, 5:47 PM, "rtgwg on behalf of internet-drafts@ietf.org"
>> <rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of 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 Routing Area Working Group of the
>IETF.
>> >
>> >        Title           : Routing Area Common YANG Data Types
>> >        Authors         : Xufeng Liu
>> >                          Yingzhen Qu
>> >                          Acee Lindem
>> >                          Christian Hopps
>> >                          Lou Berger
>> > Filename        : draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03.txt
>> > Pages           : 32
>> > Date            : 2017-05-10
>> >
>> >Abstract:
>> >   This document defines a collection of common data types using the
>> >   YANG data modeling language.  These derived common types are
>designed
>> >   to be imported by other modules defined in the routing area.
>> >
>> >
>> >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types/
>> >
>> >There are also htmlized versions available at:
>> >https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03
>>
>>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03
>> >
>> >A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> >https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtgwg-routing-types-03
>> >
>> >
>> >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/
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >rtgwg mailing list
>> >rtgwg@ietf.org
>> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtgwg mailing list
>> rtgwg@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>>
>