Re: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-04

Xufeng,

Thank you very much. I'd like to get this through before next IETF - which
means around a 3 week cycle,
with IETF Last Call for 2 weeks & then needing to be timed for the telechat.

Regards,
Alia

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Xufeng Liu <Xufeng_Liu@jabil.com> wrote:

> Thanks to Alia for the review, and Rob for the comments.
>
>
>
> We will update the model soon.
>
>
>
> As for the vrrp-global container, I think that we will move it to a
> different location, since if:interfaces-state is deprecated in the NMDA
> compatible model.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Xufeng
>
>
>
> *From:* Jeff Tantsura [mailto:jefftant.ietf@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, September 21, 2017 8:00 PM
> *To:* Robert Wilton <rwilton@cisco.com>; Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>;
> rtgwg@ietf.org; draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp@ietf.org; Martin Bjorklund <
> mbj@tail-f.com>
>
> *Subject:* Re: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-04
>
>
>
> Thanks Rob!
>
>
>
> Dear authors,
>
> please publish the updated draft ASAP.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jeff
>
> *From: *rtgwg <rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Robert Wilton <
> rwilton@cisco.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 07:23
> *To: *Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>, <
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp@ietf.org>, Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
> *Subject: *Re: AD review of draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-04
>
>
>
> Hi Alia, authors,
>
> Separately when doing the NMDA conversion on the VRRP module, I noted that
> it is directly augmenting the "/interfaces-state" container (rather than "
> /interfaces-state/interface" directly with "VRRP-global" container, which
> looked a bit odd to me (and broke my conversion tool ;-).
>
> E.g.
>
>   augment /if:interfaces-state:
>     +--ro vrrp-global
>        +--ro virtual-routers?   uint32
>        +--ro interfaces?        uint32
>        +--ro statistics
>           +--ro discontinuity-datetime?   yang:date-and-time
>           +--ro checksum-errors?          yang:counter64
>           +--ro version-errors?           yang:counter64
>           +--ro vrid-errors?              yang:counter64
>           +--ro ip-ttl-errors?            yang:counter64
>
> This naively seems like the wrong place to me, and I think that it would
> be better to place this either as a top level "vrrp" container, or perhaps
> put under the routing tree (e.g. /routing/control-plane-protocols/vrrp).
>
> I would have thought that putting this directly under the
> /interfaces-state container would mean that the /interfaces-state
> container could hold an interleaved mix of interface list entries and the
> vrrp-global container!?!
>
> E.g. I think that with the model the existing design then this following
> XML would be allowed - cc Martin in case I am wrong :-)
>
>        <interfaces-state
>
>            xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-interfaces"
>
>            xmlns:ianaift="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:iana-if-type">
>
>
>
>          <interface>
>
>            <name>eth0</name>
>
>            <type>ianaift:ethernetCsmacd</type>
>
>            <admin-status>down</admin-status>
>
>            <oper-status>down</oper-status>
>
>            ...
>
>          </interface>
>
>
>
>          <vrrp-global>
>
>             ....
>
>          </vrrp-global>
>
>
>
>          <interface>
>
>            <name>eth1</name>
>
>            <type>ianaift:ethernetCsmacd</type>
>
>            <admin-status>up</admin-status>
>
>            <oper-status>up</oper-status>
>
>            ....
>
>          </interface>
>
>
>
>          <interface>
>
>            <name>eth1.10</name>
>
>            <type>ianaift:l2vlan</type>
>
>            <admin-status>up</admin-status>
>
>            <oper-status>up</oper-status>
>
>            ....
>
>          </interface>
>
>      </interfaces-state>
>
> Thanks,
> Rob
>
>
>
> On 20/09/2017 17:35, Alia Atlas wrote:
>
> As is customary, I have done my AD review of
> draft-ietf-rtgwg-yang-vrrp-04. First, I would like to thank the authors,
> Xufeng, Athanasios, Ravi, Acee,and Mingui, as well as the WG for their work
> on this draft.  It is clear and well-written.
>
>
>
> My one issue is that it does not conform to the NMDA guidelines. I know
> that the transformation can be done largely programmatically - and Acee &
> Xufeng are quite familiar with the details.  I've also cc'd Rob Wilton who
> has some tooling to potentially help.
>
>
>
> From the shepherd's report, I understand that there is an implementation.
> That implies that the existing model should be in the appendix.
>
>
>
> I would be delighted to forward this draft to IETF Last Call (and my
> apologies for the long delay in review) after it has been updated.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alia
>
>
> _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>