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

[Xufeng Liu <[e-mail]>]

Hi Alia,

Thanks. We will try to complete the update within a week.

Best,
- Xufeng


From: Alia Atlas [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, September 22, 2017 9:03 AM
To: Xufeng Liu <[e-mail]>
Cc: Jeff Tantsura <[e-mail]>; Robert Wilton <[e-mail]>; [e-mail]; [e-mail]; Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]>
Subject: 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 <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> 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:[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>]
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 8:00 PM
To: Robert Wilton <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; Alia Atlas <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>

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 <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>> on behalf of Robert Wilton <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Date: Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 07:23
To: Alia Atlas <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>, Martin Bjorklund <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
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 [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg